Table 1.

Characteristics of study included in Meta-analysis and Systematic review of IPV and Antenatal care adequacy

Study	Sample size	Study location	Study setting	Types of violence	IPV exposure time	IPV assessment scale	NOS quality Score	Confounders
[24]	210	Ethiopia	Community / Primary survey	Physical, Sexual, emotional, partner control	Ever in current relation	WHO tool	6	women’s age, couple’s age gap, women’s educational status, partner’s educational status, women’s decision-making autonomy, women’s employment status, women’s weekly mass media exposure, couple’s relationship duration and household monthly income
[27]	294	Timor-Leste	Community /Timor-Leste DHS	IPV general	Ever in current relation	DHS tool	4	Age of the women, women’s education, and wealth.
[25]	6871	Nigeria	Community / state-wide survey	Physical IPV	Prior year	Self (With WHO component)	6	Women’s education, house hold head education, Age of the women, residency, help from family member, ownership of motorized transport, marital status/ cohabiting, wealth, proximity to government health facility, information from health worker regarding pregnancy, gravidity
[28]	2001	Bangladesh	Community/Bangladesh DHS	Physical, sexual, combined IPV	Lifetime	Conflict tactic scale	5	Women’s age, women’s education, husband’s education, women’s decision-making and freedom of movement autonomy, women’s occupation, residence, religion, frequency of mass media exposure, parity, pregnancy intentions, and wealth index category
[26]	418	Ghana	Community /Nationally representative data	Emotional and physical violence during pregnancy	Pregnancy	Self with WHO components	5	Women’s age, marital status, women’s education, religion, wealth quantile, residency, general health of the women, region of the respondent, number of the children
[14]	6566	Egypt	Community/Egypt DHS	Physical	Life time	Self	3	Women’s education, residency, parity