Back

Quality of postnatal care for mothers and neonates in Mexico: insights from the maternal eCohort study

Paredes-Cruz, M.; Perez-Moran, D.; Doubova, S. V.; Arsenault, C.; Quinzanos-Fresnedo, C.

2025-04-05 primary care research
10.1101/2025.04.04.25325240 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveThe study aimed to evaluate healthcare use during the postnatal period (PNC) for mothers and their babies, the content of care received, mothers perceived quality of care, and the factors influencing these perceptions. MethodsThe study analyzed postnatal survey from the maternal eCohort conducted at the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS), which included 973 women aged 18 to 49 recruited after their first antenatal care visit with a family physician at 48 family medicine clinics in eight states in Mexico. We assessed PNC use, content of care and perceived quality using descriptive analysis. We used Poisson multivariable regression analysis to investigate the factors influencing womens perceptions of higher quality of care during PNC. Results29.4% of women and 12.0% of infants lacked healthcare during the postnatal period. Most women who received PNC attended consultations at IMSS (72.3%), while 17.7% combined IMSS with other providers, and 10% used only private services. Infants received 82.4% of recommended care, compared to 66.7% for mothers. The median perceived quality of care among women was 25 points on a scale of 8 to 40. Areas of opportunity include promoting the importance of postnatal consultations among health personnel and women, reducing waiting times, and improving the content and length of consultations. Factors associated with better perceived quality included being over 35, receiving better content of care for infants, and being treated by private providers, while lower education levels, prior pregnancies, and poor health were associated with lower perceived quality. ConclusionImprovements are needed to ensure all women and infants receive comprehensive postnatal care and perceive it as high quality.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.