The impact of economic growth and recessions on maternal and child health outcomes in sub-Saharan African countries: a systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The discourse surrounding the relationship between economic growth and maternal and child health has extended over several years. While some studies highlight the potential positive impact of economic growth on maternal and child health, others challenge the conventional belief that economic growth invariably translates to improved maternal and child health. Recent findings suggest that its role as a sole determinant of mortality outcomes has declined over time. This systematic review aims to consolidate existing literature and offer a comprehensive overview of this relationship in sub-Saharan African countries. METHODS: A structured search of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, EconLit, and Global Health was conducted. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies published between 2000 to 2022 that examined national level economic growth and recession in conjunction with health outcomes of mothers and children in sub-Saharan African countries. RESULTS: A total of 1167 studies were initially identified from the database searches, of which 18 met the inclusion criteria for data extraction. The review presents a range of findings. Eleven studies underscore the significant impact of economic growth in reducing child mortality and undernutrition, and maternal mortality rate. Conversely, other studies indicated insignificant or inconsistent associations, emphasizing the importance of various socio-economic factors such as female education, equitable resource distribution, effective governance, and comprehensive maternal and child health coverage and interventions. These factors are considered crucial in maximizing the benefits derived from national economic growth. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should explore alternative economic growth indicators such as, inequality-adjusted Human Development Index and Genuine Progress Indicator, to better capture several socio-economic factors. Additionally, expanding the timeframe could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of economic growth and recession on maternal and child health in sub-Saharan Africa.
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 | 0.010 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".