Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2013 May 18;381(9879):1736-46.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60685-6.

Women's groups practising participatory learning and action to improve maternal and newborn health in low-resource settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Audrey Prost  1 , Tim Colbourn, Nadine Seward, Kishwar Azad, Arri Coomarasamy, Andrew Copas, Tanja A J Houweling, Edward Fottrell, Abdul Kuddus, Sonia Lewycka, Christine MacArthur, Dharma Manandhar, Joanna Morrison, Charles Mwansambo, Nirmala Nair, Bejoy Nambiar, David Osrin, Christina Pagel, Tambosi Phiri, Anni-Maria Pulkki-Brännström, Mikey Rosato, Jolene Skordis-Worrall, Naomi Saville, Neena Shah More, Bhim Shrestha, Prasanta Tripathy, Amie Wilson, Anthony Costello
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Women's groups practising participatory learning and action to improve maternal and newborn health in low-resource settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Audrey Prost et al. Lancet. .

Erratum in

  • Lancet. 2014 May 24;383(9931):1806

Abstract

Background: Maternal and neonatal mortality rates remain high in many low-income and middle-income countries. Different approaches for the improvement of birth outcomes have been used in community-based interventions, with heterogeneous effects on survival. We assessed the effects of women's groups practising participatory learning and action, compared with usual care, on birth outcomes in low-resource settings.

Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials undertaken in Bangladesh, India, Malawi, and Nepal in which the effects of women's groups practising participatory learning and action were assessed to identify population-level predictors of effect on maternal mortality, neonatal mortality, and stillbirths. We also reviewed the cost-effectiveness of the women's group intervention and estimated its potential effect at scale in Countdown countries.

Findings: Seven trials (119,428 births) met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses of all trials showed that exposure to women's groups was associated with a 37% reduction in maternal mortality (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.32-0.94), a 23% reduction in neonatal mortality (0.77, 0.65-0.90), and a 9% non-significant reduction in stillbirths (0.91, 0.79-1.03), with high heterogeneity for maternal (I(2)=58.8%, p=0.024) and neonatal results (I(2)=64.7%, p=0.009). In the meta-regression analyses, the proportion of pregnant women in groups was linearly associated with reduction in both maternal and neonatal mortality (p=0.026 and p=0.011, respectively). A subgroup analysis of the four studies in which at least 30% of pregnant women participated in groups showed a 55% reduction in maternal mortality (0.45, 0.17-0.73) and a 33% reduction in neonatal mortality (0.67, 0.59-0.74). The intervention was cost effective by WHO standards and could save an estimated 283,000 newborn infants and 41,100 mothers per year if implemented in rural areas of 74 Countdown countries.

Interpretation: With the participation of at least a third of pregnant women and adequate population coverage, women's groups practising participatory learning and action are a cost-effective strategy to improve maternal and neonatal survival in low-resource settings.

Funding: Wellcome Trust, Ammalife, and National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for Birmingham and the Black Country programme.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow chart of the study selection process
Figure 2
Figure 2. Meta-analysis of the effect of women’s groups practising participatory learning and action on maternal mortality (A) and neonatal mortality (B)
Weights are from random-effects analysis.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Meta-regression analysis of the effect of women’s groups by percentage of pregnant women participating in groups for (A) maternal mortality and (B) neonatal mortality
Green triangles show the predicted effect with random-effects meta-regression to allow for between study variation.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Subgroup analysis of the effect of women’s groups on maternal mortality (A) and neonatal mortality (B), by percentage of pregnant women participating in groups
Weights are from random-effects analysis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. WHO. UNICEF [accessed Feb 8, 2013];Countdown 2015: building a future for women and children, the 2012 report. http://countdown2015mnch.org/documents/2012Report/2012-Complete.pdf.
    1. Lozano R, Wang H, Foreman KJ, et al. Progress towards Millennium Development Goals 4 and 5 on maternal and child mortality: an updated systematic analysis. Lancet. 2011;378:1139–65. - PubMed
    1. UNICEF . Levels and trends in child mortality: estimates developed by the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation. UNICEF; New York: [accessed Feb 8, 2013]. 2012. http://www.childinfo.org/files/Child_Mortality_Report_2012.pdf.
    1. Darmstadt GL, Bhutta ZA, Cousens S, Adam T, Walker N, de Bernis L, for the Lancet Neonatal Survival Steering Team Evidence-based, cost-effective interventions: how many newborn babies can we save? Lancet. 2005;365:977–88. - PubMed
    1. Lassi ZS, Haider BA, Bhutta ZA. Community-based intervention packages for reducing maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality and improving neonatal outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;11:CD007754. - PubMed

Publication types