ReviewCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2010
Update on well-baby and well-child care from 0 to 5 years: What's new in the Rourke Baby Record?
Review in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge mobilization for primary care: Lessons learned from 40 years of the Rourke Baby Record.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2022Article
- Article
- Reliability of routinely collected anthropometric measurements in primary care.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Rourke Baby Record 2017: Clinical update for preventive care of children up to 5 years of age.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Review
- Review
- A Framework for Developing a Curriculum Regarding Autism Spectrum Disorders for Primary Care Providers.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2015Article
- Newborn physiological immaturity: a concept analysis.Advances in neonatal care : official journal of the National Association of Neonatal Nurses · 2015Article
- Getting it right from birth to kindergarten: what's new in the Rourke Baby Record?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2013Article
- Oral health care for children - a call for action.Paediatrics & child health · 2013Article
- Inconsistency in breastfeeding guidelines.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide an overview of the 2009 edition of the Rourke Baby Record (RBR), which incorporates recent research in the literature relating to preventive health care for children aged 0 to 5 years. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: Recommendations are identified as supported by good, fair, or consensus evidence, according to the classification of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. MAIN MESSAGE: New information and recommendations are given for growth monitoring, nutrition, developmental surveillance, physical examination maneuvers, immunization schedules, and advice for parents. Anticipatory guidance updates relate to injury prevention, infant swaddling, literacy facilitation, nonparental child care, parenting skills programs, serum lead levels, over-the-counter cough and cold medications, pacifiers, antipyretics, insect repellents, and dental care and oral health. The 2009 RBR is available in English and French in both National and Ontario versions and is endorsed by the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the Canadian Paediatric Society.
conclusionThe RBR website (www.rourkebabyrecord.ca) provides a practical tool for well-baby and well-child care, including background information, current evidence and literature review appraisal, an interactive walk-through of the guides with links to further information and evidence, and additional practical resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21156890PMC3001919What 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.