The DOI matches its Crossref record; 197 of the 197 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Access barriers to obstetric care at health facilities in sub-Saharan Africa—a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Since 2000, the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals, which included a goal to improve maternal health by the end of 2015, has facilitated significant reductions in maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. However, despite more focused efforts made especially by low- and middle-income countries, targets were largely unmet in sub-Saharan Africa, where women are plagued by many challenges in seeking obstetric care. The aim of this review was to synthesise literature on barriers to obstetric care at health institutions in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: This review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Scopus databases were electronically searched to identify studies on barriers to health facility-based obstetric care in sub-Saharan Africa, in English, and dated between 2000 and 2015. Combinations of search terms 'obstetric care', 'access', 'barriers', 'developing countries' and 'sub-Saharan Africa' were used to locate articles. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies were considered. A narrative synthesis approach was employed to synthesise the evidence and explore relationships between included studies. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty articles met the inclusion criteria. Currently, obstetric care access is hindered by several demand- and supply-side barriers. The principal demand-side barriers identified were limited household resources/income, non-availability of means of transportation, indirect transport costs, a lack of information on health care services/providers, issues related to stigma and women's self-esteem/assertiveness, a lack of birth preparation, cultural beliefs/practices and ignorance about required obstetric health services. On the supply-side, the most significant barriers were cost of services, physical distance between health facilities and service users' residence, long waiting times at health facilities, poor staff knowledge and skills, poor referral practices and poor staff interpersonal relationships. CONCLUSION: Despite similarities in obstetric care barriers across sub-Saharan Africa, country-specific strategies are required to tackle the challenges mentioned. Governments need to develop strategies to improve healthcare systems and overall socioeconomic status of women, in order to tackle supply- and demand-side access barriers to obstetric care. It is also important that strategies adopted are supported by research evidence appropriate for local conditions. Finally, more research is needed, particularly, with regard to supply-side interventions that may improve the obstetric care experience of pregnant women. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2014 CRD42014015549.
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
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Wang, G., Ma, R., Qiao, G., Wada, K., Aizawa, Y., & Satoh, T. (2015) · Integrative Medicine International · doi:10.1159/000368408 · Cited by 18,657
Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.363 · Cited by 8,848
WHO analysis of causes of maternal death: a systematic review
Khan, K. S., Wojdyla, D., Say, L., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Van Look, P. F. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68397-9 · Cited by 3,978
Too far to walk: Maternal mortality in context
Thaddeus, S., & Maine, D. (1994) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)90226-7 · Cited by 3,240
Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., Britten, N., Roen, K., & Duffy, S. (2006) · Lancaster University · doi:10.13140/2.1.1018.4643 · Cited by 2,070
Maternal mortality: who, when, where, and why
Ronsmans, C., & Graham, W. J. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)69380-x · Cited by 1,801
Cited by
Barriers to Accessing Maternal Care in Low Income Countries in Africa: A Systematic Review.
Dahab, R., & Sakellariou, D. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17124292 · Cited by 335
Natamba, B. K., Namara, A. A., & Nyirenda, M. J. (2019) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-019-2593-z · Cited by 100
Govender, D., Naidoo, S., & Taylor, M. (2020) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-020-03319-7 · Cited by 84
Lacroze, E., Frühauf, A., Nordmann, K., Rampanjato, Z., Muller, N., De Neve, J.-W., Andriamampianina, R., Rajemison, E., Bärnighausen, T., Knauss, S., et al. (2023) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0279880 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Kyei-Nimakoh, M., Carolan-Olah, M., & McCann, T. V.
- Venue
- Systematic Reviews
- Published
- 2017-06-06
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 110-110
- ISSN
- 2046-4053 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2624267132
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 197
- FWCI
- 6.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Access barriers to obstetric care at health facilities in sub-Saharan Africa—a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13643-017-0503-x
- The paper
- Kyei-Nimakoh, M., Carolan-Olah, M., & McCann, T. V. (2017). Access barriers to obstetric care at health facilities in sub-Saharan Africa—a systematic review. Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0503-x
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.