MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410121737 · doi:10.3390/healthcare13091076

The Impact of Prenatal Care on the Prevention of Neonatal Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Global Health Interventions

2025· review· en· W4410121737 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammed Albarqi

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Faisal University
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionPrenatal carePsychosocialLow birth weightMeta-analysisPediatricsEnvironmental healthPregnancyFamily medicineNursingPsychiatryPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Neonatal outcomes, including low birth weight, preterm birth, and neonatal mortality, pose significant global health challenges, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Prenatal care has emerged as a critical intervention in mitigating these risks through medical, nutritional, and psychosocial support. This study aimed to systematically assess the effectiveness of prenatal care interventions in preventing neonatal outcomes across diverse settings. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, with the protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024601066). Fourteen peer-reviewed studies were included following a comprehensive search across five major databases. Eligible studies reported quantitative neonatal outcomes associated with prenatal care interventions, including nutritional supplementation, mental health services, telehealth, and routine antenatal care. Random-effects models were used for meta-analysis, and the risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Nutritional interventions, especially folic acid and iron supplementation, significantly reduced neonatal mortality by up to 40% (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.54–0.68). High-quality prenatal care was associated with a 41% reduction in neonatal mortality. Psychosocial support reduced the risk of low birth weight and preterm birth, while telehealth interventions lowered NICU admissions in low-risk populations (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.75–1.03). Heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 70%), and publication bias was suggested. Conclusions: Comprehensive prenatal care, integrating medical, nutritional, and mental health interventions, significantly improves neonatal outcomes. The global implementation of accessible, high-quality prenatal services is essential, particularly in underserved populations, to reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.007
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.389 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207