Compliance with Iron and Folic Acid Supplementation (IFAS) and associated factors among pregnant women in Sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anemia is one of the world's leading cause of disability and the most serious global public health issues. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted very carefully in order to give up the pooled compliance of Iron and Folic-Acid Supplementation in Sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: To conduct this brief systematic review and meta-analysis, a related literature search was done from different sources, PubMed Medline and Google Scholar Journals. Then IFA Supplementation related searching engine was used to make the work more meaningful and intensive. Moreover, we used modified Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cross sectional studies to assess the quality of the study in terms of their inclusion. Then, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed to carry out the work in a carful manner. Finally, the pooled effect size was computed using the review manager and Compressive Meta-analysis software. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies, which encompassed 24272 pregnant women, were chosen for the analysis. From those an overall prevalence of compliance with Iron and Folic Acid Supplementation (IFAS) in pregnancy in SSA was 39.2%. However, the result from meta-analysis showed that women who were counseled on IFAS in their courses of pregnancy were 1.96 times more likely to adhere to IFAS compared to those who were not counseled [OR:1.96, 95% CI (1.76-,5.93)]. Moreover, it showed that women who had knowledge of IFAS were 2.71 times more likely to have compliance with IFAS as compared to those who had no knowledge of IFAS [OR:2.71, 95% CI (1.33,5.54)]. Also it revealed that those women who had knowledge of anemia were 5.42 times more likely to have compliance with IFAS as compared with those who had no knowledge of anemia [OR5.42, 95% CI (1.52, 19.43)]. Furthermore, women who had received fourth visit for ANC were 1.54 times more likely to have compliance with IFAS as compared to those who had not received for ANC [OR 1.54, 95% CI (0.66, 3.58.43)]. CONCLUSIONS: Our finding from this systematic review and meta-analysis shows the low case in prevalence of compliance to IFAS among pregnant women in SSA. Predictors for this includes: knowledge about anemia, knowledge about IFAS, counseling on IFAS and receiving fourth antenatal care visit were statistically correlated positively with compliance to IFAS. This demands careful appraisal of effect of prevention work for functioning policy, programs and plan nutrition intrusions for refining maternal dietary intake in gestation. Also dietary education intrusion requires to be planned to satisfy the needs of pregnant women. So we hope that the result of this study might be essential as a bridging stone for policy makers of Africa; exclusively for maternal and child health care. Finally, we recommended further studies to be conducted in the area of the study for more intensive and detailed suggestions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".