Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20980274›Full record

ReviewArchives of disease in childhood2010

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

David Osrin, Audrey Prost

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of disease in childhood, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Quality-of-care audits and perinatal mortality in South Africa.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2015
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David OsrinCentre for International Health and Development, UCL Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, UK. d.osrin@ich.ucl.ac.uk
Audrey Prost

Funding

Wellcome Trust 081052Wellcome Trust 081052/Z/06/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledPerinatal 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

interventiona 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.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesMedically Underserved AreaPerinatal MortalityCommunity Health ServicesDelivery of Health CareEvidence-Based MedicineGlobal HealthHumansInfant, NewbornPerinatal CarePublic Sector

Identifiers

PMID20980274
PMCPMC3428881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.