Background Most pregnancy hypertension estimates in less-developed countries are from cross-sectional hospital surveys and are considered overestimates. We estimated population-based rates by standardised methods in 27 intervention clusters of the Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) cluster randomised trials. Methods and findings CLIP-eligible pregnant women identified in their homes or local primary health centres (2013–2017). Included here are women who had delivered by trial end and received a visit from a community health worker trained to provide supplementary hypertension-oriented care, including standardised blood pressure (BP) measurement. Hypertension (BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg) was defined as chronic (first detected at <20 weeks gestation) or gestational (≥20 weeks); pre-eclampsia was gestational hypertension plus proteinuria or a pre-eclampsia-defining complication. A multi-level regression model compared hypertension rates and types between countries ( p < 0.05 considered significant). In 28,420 pregnancies studied, women were usually young (median age 23–28 years), parous (53.7%–77.3%), with singletons (≥97.5%), and enrolled at a median gestational age of 10.4 (India) to 25.9 weeks (Mozambique). Basic education varied (22.8% in Pakistan to 57.9% in India). Pregnancy hypertension incidence was lower in Pakistan (9.3%) than India (10.3%), Mozambique (10.9%), or Nigeria (10.2%) ( p = 0.001). Most hypertension was diastolic only (46.4% in India, 72.7% in Pakistan, 61.3% in Mozambique, and 63.3% in Nigeria). At first presentation with elevated BP, gestational hypertension was most common diagnosis (particularly in Mozambique [8.4%] versus India [6.9%], Pakistan [6.5%], and Nigeria [7.1%]; p < 0.001), followed by pre-eclampsia (India [3.8%], Nigeria [3.0%], Pakistan [2.4%], and Mozambique [2.3%]; p < 0.001) and chronic hypertension (especially in Mozambique [2.5%] and Nigeria [2.8%], compared with India [1.2%] and Pakistan [1.5%]; p < 0.001). Inclusion of additional diagnoses of hypertension and related complications, from household surveys or facility record review (unavailable in Nigeria), revealed higher hypertension incidence: 14.0% in India, 11.6% in Pakistan, and 16.8% in Mozambique; eclampsia was rare (<0.5%). Conclusions Pregnancy hypertension is common in less-developed settings. Most women in this study presented with gestational hypertension amenable to surveillance and timed delivery to improve outcomes. Trial registration This study is a secondary analysis of a clinical trial - ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT01911494 .

Highlights As implemented, the CLIP intervention did not improve the primary composite outcome. ASHAs and ANMs were able to undertake all aspects of the mobile health app-guided visits. Women could not be reached in their communities as frequently as planned. Eight or more POM-guided contacts were associated with fewer stillbirths supporting WHO guidance. Community-level interventions are unlikely to improve outcomes without enhanced facility care.

Highlights Task-sharing activities to detect and manage pregnancy hypertension can be achieved by CHWs. Community engagement activities can achieve a community-driven transport plan. Intervention effects may have been masked by incomplete implementation or weak in-facility care. Contact intensity analyses support the WHO eight contact antenatal care model. Condition-focused community-based interventions without facility strengthening are inadequate.

Highlights Task-sharing activities to detect and manage pregnancy hypertension can be achieved by CHWs. Intervention effects may have been masked by incomplete implementation or weak in-facility care. Contact intensity analyses support the WHO eight contact antenatal care model. Condition-focused community-based interventions without facility strengthening are inadequate.

Background: Travel time to care is known to influence uptake of health services. Generally, pregnant women who take longer to transit to health facilities are the least likely to deliver in facilities. It is not clear if modelled access predicts fairly the vulnerability in women seeking maternal care across different spatial settings. Objectives: This cross-sectional analysis aimed to (i) compare travel times to care as modelled in a GIS environment with self-reported travel times by women seeking maternal care in Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia: Mozambique, India and Pakistan; and (ii) investigate the assumption that women would seek care at the closest health facility. Methods: Women were interviewed to obtain estimated travel times to health facilities (R). Travel time to the closest facility was also modelled (P) (closest facility tool (ArcGIS)) and time to facility where care was sought estimated (A) (route network layer finder (ArcGIS)). Bland-Altman analysis compared spatial variation in differences between modelled and self-reported travel times. Variations between travel times to the nearest facility (P) with modelled travel times to the actual facilities accessed (A) were analysed. Log-transformed data comparison graphs for medians, with box plots superimposed distributions were used. Results: Modelled geographical access (P) is generally lower than self-reported access (R), but there is a geography to this relationship. In India and Pakistan, potential access (P) compared fairly with self-reported travel times (R) [P (H 0 : Mean difference = 0)] < .001, limits of agreement: [− 273.81; 56.40] and [− 264.10; 94.25] respectively. In Mozambique, mean differences between the two measures of access were significantly different from 0 [P (H 0 : Mean difference = 0) = 0.31, limits of agreement: [− 187.26; 199.96]]. Conclusion: Modelling access successfully predict potential vulnerability in populations. Differences between modelled (P) and self-reported travel times (R) are partially a result of women not seeking care at their closest facilities.