↓ Skip to main content

The effect of participatory women's groups on birth outcomes in Bangladesh: does coverage matter? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
The effect of participatory women's groups on birth outcomes in Bangladesh: does coverage matter? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-12-208
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanja AJ Houweling, Kishwar Azad, Layla Younes, Abdul Kuddus, Sanjit Shaha, Bedowra Haq, Tasmin Nahar, James Beard, Edward F Fottrell, Audrey Prost, Anthony Costello, the PCP study team

Abstract

Progress on neonatal survival has been slow in most countries. While there is evidence on what works to reduce newborn mortality, there is limited knowledge on how to deliver interventions effectively when health systems are weak. Cluster randomized trials have shown strong reductions in neonatal mortality using community mobilisation with women's groups in rural Nepal and India. A similar trial in Bangladesh showed no impact. A main hypothesis is that this negative finding is due to the much lower coverage of women's groups in the intervention population in Bangladesh compared to India and Nepal. For evidence-based policy making it is important to examine if women's group coverage is a main determinant of their impact. The study aims to test the effect on newborn and maternal health outcomes of a participatory women's group intervention with a high population coverage of women's groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 113 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 14%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 28 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 26%
Social Sciences 22 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 34 29%