Inequalities in antenatal care service utilization in Nepal: evidence from nationally representative Nepal multiple indictor cluster surveys 2014 and 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Antenatal care (ANC) is essential for improving maternal and neonatal health outcomes, and its utilization is influenced by socioeconomic factors. This study aims to assess disparities in ANC service utilization by wealth, caste/ethnicity, and province among Nepalese women, using data from the nationally representative Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) 2014 and 2019. METHODS: We assessed the association of ANC service utilization with the household wealth index quintiles, caste/ethnicity and province using multivariable logistic and negative binomial regression models. We also measured wealth-related inequality using concentration curves and concentration indices. RESULTS: The proportion of women who received four or more ANC visits increased from 60.6% in 2014 to 77.8% in 2019. However, in both 2014 and 2019, women in the highest wealth quintile were over five times more likely to receive recommended ANC visits than those in the lowest quintiles. Similarly, the expected number of ANC visits was 70% higher in 2014 and 35% higher in 2019 for women in the highest wealth quintile compared to the lowest quintile. Concentration curves showed a decrease in pro-rich inequality in ANC utilization by 2019 relative to 2014, though notable inequality remained. Geographic disparities were evident: Karnali and Madhesh provinces had significantly lower utilization of recommended ANC visits and fewer ANC visits than Koshi Province. Ethnic disparities were also prominent, with women from Dalit, Disadvantaged Janajati, and Other Madheshi caste groups being significantly less likely to complete recommended ANC visits. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal persistent wealth-related inequality in ANC service utilization in Nepal, with women from wealthier households, advantaged caste/ethnic groups and better-off provinces having higher odds of receiving recommended ANC visits and a higher number of ANC visits. Concerted efforts are needed to address these equity gaps in ANC service utilization, particularly for women from low-income households, disadvantaged caste/ethnic groups, and underserved provinces.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".