4.5 Article

Perinatal interventions and survival in resource-poor settings: which work, which don't, which have the jury out?

Journal

ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD
Volume 95, Issue 12, Pages 1039-1046

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/adc.2009.179366

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [081052/Z/06/Z]
  2. UK Department for International Development
  3. Wellcome Trust Strategic Group on the Population Science of Maternal and Child Survival
  4. Wellcome Trust [081052/Z/06/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Perinatal conditions make the largest contribution to the burden of disease in low-income countries. Although postneonatal mortality rates have declined, stillbirth and early neonatal mortality rates remain high in many countries in Africa and Asia, and there is a concentration of mortality around the time of birth. Our article begins by considering differences in the interpretation of 'intervention' to improve perinatal survival. We identify three types of intervention: a single action, a collection of actions delivered in a package and a broader social or system approach. We use this classification to summarise the findings of recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. After describing the growing evidence base for the effectiveness of community-based perinatal care, we discuss current concerns about integration: of women's and children's health programmes, of community-based and institutional care, and of formal and informal sector human resources. We end with some thoughts on the complexity of choices confronting women and their families in low-income countries, particularly in view of the growth in non-government and private sector healthcare.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available