MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415995499 · doi:10.1186/s12884-025-08346-w

Predictors of birth asphyxia in Ethiopia: an updated systematic review with meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4415995499 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mulugeta Dile Worke, Benyam Seifu, Belete Belgu, Kasiye Shiferaw

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLaerdal Foundation for Acute Medicine
KeywordsAsphyxiaReproductive medicinePsychological interventionMultidisciplinary approachPublic healthIntervention (counseling)Infant mortalityPremature birthLive birth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Birth asphyxia is one of the leading causes of most neonatal deaths. Hence, strengthening and investing in care is crucial, particularly around birth and the first week of life. As a result, several studies, including an umbrella review, were conducted even though significant variations were observed among those investigations. Thus, this is an updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine predictors of birth asphyxia in Ethiopia. METHODS: Online databases such as CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched. Online searches turned up pertinent grey literature, and repositories of several universities were also searched. Observational studies carried out in Ethiopia were included. The authors conducted an independent search, quality check, and data extraction. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale checklist was used to evaluate the quality of articles. STATA version 17 was used for both data entry and statistical analysis. Since there were variations among studies, a random-effect model was employed for analysis. Egger's regression test and funnel plot were utilized to assess publication bias, and the I-squared test was performed to verify the studies' heterogeneity. RESULTS: This analysis comprised 38 studies with 13,593 sample sizes. The pooled prevalence of birth asphyxia was 23.07% (95% CI: 19.96, 26.18). An intrapartum (i.e., prolonged labor, blood- or meconium-stained amniotic fluid, tight nuchal cord, cord prolapse, intrapartum fetal distress, malposition/malpresentation, and premature rupture of membrane) and obstetric procedure (i.e., labor induction, emergency cesarean sections, instrumental deliveries, and night time deliveries) factors were significantly associated with birth asphyxia. Moreover; neonatal (i.e., low birth weight, premature birth, and the male sex of the neonate), and maternal (i.e., place of residence, primigravida, mother's age, chronic hypertension, pregnancy-induced hypertension, anemia throughout pregnancy, antepartum hemorrhage, absence of antenatal care follow-up) were also significantly associated with birth asphyxia. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicates nearly one in four newborns suffered from birth asphyxia in Ethiopia. It implicates tailored interventions for an intrapartum, maternal, neonatal, and an obstetrics procedure-related associated factors are needed to reduce birth asphyxia, thereby enhancing achievement of the sustainable development goal that aimed to reduce neonatal mortality to less than 12 per 1000 live births. Therefore, advocacy for public health initiatives aimed at increasing awareness of birth asphyxia and promoting early detection and intervention strategies, multidisciplinary approaches, and interventional studies are crucial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.032
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth→Same topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology→French-language works237,207→