Individual and community-level determinants of quality antenatal care in six South Asian countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maternal health is a global public health concern. The paucity of antenatal care (ANC) during pregnancy is directly associated with maternal mortality. This study assessed the individual and community-level determinants of quality ANC in six South-Asian countries. Data were obtained from a Demographic health survey of six South-Asian countries. This study included a sample of 180,567 (weighted) women aged 15-49 who had given birth in the preceding three years prior to the survey. The quality of ANC was determined by assessing whether a woman had received blood pressure monitoring, urine and blood sample screening, and iron supplements at any ANC visits. Frequency, percentage distribution, and inferential analysis (multilevel mixed-effects model) were conducted. The proportion of quality antenatal care utilization in South Asia was 66.9%. The multilevel analysis showed that women aged 35-49 years (AOR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.09-1.24), higher education (AOR = 2.84; 95% CI = 2.69-2.99), middle wealth status (AOR = 1.55; 95% CI = 1.49-1.62), richest wealth status (AOR = 3.21; 95% CI = 3.04-3.39), unwanted pregnancy (AOR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.89-0.95) and 2-4 birth order (AOR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.83-0.89) were among the individual-level factors that were significantly associated with quality ANC utilization. In addition, rural residence (AOR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.74-0.8), and big problem - distance to health facility (AOR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.53-0.76) were the among community level factors there were also significantly associated with use of quality ANC. Meanwhile, women who lived in India (AOR: 22.57; 95% CI: 20.32-25.08) and Maldives (AOR: 33.33; 95% CI: 31.06-35.76) had higher odds of quality ANC than those lived in Afghanistan. Educational status, wealth status, pregnancy wantedness, sex of household head, birth order, place of residence, and distance to health facility were associated with quality ANC. Improving educational status, improving wealth status, reducing the distance to health facilities, and providing rural area-friendly interventions are important to increase the quality of ANC in South Asia.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".