The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Determinants of late and/or inadequate use of prenatal healthcare in high-income countries: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Prenatal healthcare is likely to prevent adverse outcomes, but an adequate review of utilization and its determinants is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the evidence for the determinants of prenatal healthcare utilization in high-income countries. METHOD: Search of publications in EMBASE, CINAHL and PubMed (1992-2010). Studies that attempted to study determinants of prenatal healthcare utilization in high-income countries were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of the studies. Only high-quality studies were included. Data on inadequate use (i.e. late initiation, low-use, inadequate use or non-use) were categorized as individual, contextual and health behaviour-related determinants. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible. RESULTS: Ultimately eight high-quality studies were included. Low maternal age, low educational level, non-marital status, ethnic minority, planned pattern of prenatal care, hospital type, unplanned place of delivery, uninsured status, high parity, no previous premature birth and late recognition of pregnancy were identified as individual determinants of inadequate use. Contextual determinants included living in distressed neighbourhoods. Living in neighbourhoods with higher rates of unemployment, single parent families, medium-average family incomes, low-educated residents, and women reporting Canadian Aboriginal status were associated with inadequate use or entering care after 6 months. Regarding health behaviour, inadequate use was more likely among women who smoked during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Evidence for determinants of prenatal care utilization is limited. More studies are needed to ensure adequate prenatal care for pregnant women at risk.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Breastfeeding
Jones, K. M., Power, M. L., Queenan, J. T., & Schulkin, J. (2015) · Breastfeeding Medicine · doi:10.1089/bfm.2014.0152 · Cited by 408
Wang, E., Glazer, K. B., Howell, E. A., & Janevic, T. M. (2020) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003762 · Cited by 353
DiOrio, D., Kroeger, K., & Ross, A. (2018) · Sexually Transmitted Diseases · doi:10.1097/olq.0000000000000783 · Cited by 73
Phillips-Beck, W., Sinclair, S., Campbell, R., Star, L., Cidro, J., Wicklow, B., Guillemette, L., Morris, M. I., & McGavock, J. M. (2019) · Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease · doi:10.1017/s2040174418000661 · Cited by 44
Metadata
- Authors
- Feijen-de Jong, E. I., Jansen, D. E., Baarveld, F., van der Schans, C. P., Schellevis, F. G., & Reijneveld, S. A.
- Venue
- The European Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-11-21
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 904-913
- ISSN
- 1101-1262 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-360X
- OpenAlex
- W2132539553
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Determinants of late and/or inadequate use of prenatal healthcare in high-income countries: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurpub/ckr164
- The paper
- Feijen-de Jong, E. I., Jansen, D. E., Baarveld, F., van der Schans, C. P., Schellevis, F. G., & Reijneveld, S. A. (2012). Determinants of late and/or inadequate use of prenatal healthcare in high-income countries: a systematic review. The European Journal of Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckr164
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.