ArticlePaediatrics & child health2001
Early neonatal discharge guidelines: Have we dropped the ball?
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine patterns of follow-up and prenatal education by family physicians and to assess whether practice patterns comply with the 1996 Canadian Paediatric Society/Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (CPS/SOGC) guidelines for early neonatal discharge.
designMail survey.
settingA community of 300,000 people who were served exclusively for obstetrical care by a tertiary care hospital that performs 5000 deliveries per year and provides an early discharge program (EDP).
participantsFamily physicians who provide prenatal and/or newborn care.
main outcome measuresThe timing of neonatal follow-up and parental teaching by family physicians.
resultsThirty-two per cent of the respondents scheduled their first postnatal visits two or more weeks after early discharge. There was no significant difference (P=0.7) in scheduling of follow-up for babies who were part of an EDP compared with those who were not. Fewer than 20% of physician respondents provided antenatal education in preparation for early discharge.
conclusionsThe 1996 CPS/SOGC guidelines for physician follow-up after early neonatal discharge and for anticipatory parental education are not being followed consistently; however, these guidelines were disseminated without reinforcement. Until further study supports a change in practice guidelines, appropriate implementation strategies must be employed to ensure compliance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.