↓ Skip to main content

Supply kits for antenatal and childbirth care: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Supply kits for antenatal and childbirth care: a systematic review
Published in
Reproductive Health, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12978-017-0436-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alicia Aleman, Giselle Tomasso, María Luisa Cafferata, Mercedes Colomar, Ana Pilar Betran

Abstract

It is critical to increase the uptake of interventions proven to be effective to improve maternal and perinatal outcomes. Supply kits have been suggested to be a feasible strategy designed to ensure timely availability and effective follow-up of care. We conducted a systematic review to summarize the evidence on the uptake, effectiveness and safety of supply kits for maternal care. MEDLINE, the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, Campbell Collaboration, Lilacs, Embase and unpublished studies were searched. Studies that reported the efficacy, safety and use of supply kits for maternal healthcare were eligible. Participants were pregnant women or in childbirth. Supply kits were defined as a collection of medicines, supplies or instruments packaged together with the aim of conducting a healthcare task. Two reviewers independently performed the screening, data extraction, and methodological and quality assessment. 24 studies were included: 4 of them were systematic reviews and 20 primary studies. Eighteen studies evaluated a so-called "clean delivery kit". In all but two studies, the kits were used by more than half of the participants. A meta-analysis was deemed inappropriate due to the heterogeneity in study design, in the components of the interventions implemented, in the content of the kits, and in outcomes. Nine studies assessed neonatal outcomes and found statistically significant reductions in cord infection, sepsis and tetanus-related mortality in the intervention group. Three studies showed evidence of reduced neonatal mortality (OR 0.52, 0.60 and 0.71) with statistically significant confidence intervals in all cases. Four studies reported odd ratios for maternal mortality, but only one showed evidence of a statistically significant decrease in this outcome but it was ascribed to hand washing prior to childbirth and not with the use of kits. This review suggests potential benefits in the use of supply kits to improve maternal and neonatal health. However, the observational nature of the studies, the heterogeneity and the use of kits incorporated within complex interventions limit the interpretation of the findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 5%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 37 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 5%
Unspecified 4 4%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 42 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,307,981
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#1,038
of 1,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,724
of 439,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#41
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.