Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24330472›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2013

Lessons learned from stakeholders in a facilitation intervention targeting neonatal health in Quang Ninh province, Vietnam.

Leif Eriksson, Duong M Duc, Ann Catrine Eldh, Pham N Thanh Vu, Q Huy Tran, Mats Målqvist, Lars Wallin

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Leif ErikssonDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, International Maternal and Child Health (IMCH), Uppsala University, SE-751 85, Uppsala, Sweden. leif.eriksson@kbh.uu.se.
Duong M Duc
Ann Catrine Eldh
Pham N Thanh Vu
Q Huy Tran
Mats Målqvist
Lars Wallin
Hanoi School Of Public Health · VNUppsala University · SEDalarna University · SEKarolinska Institutet · SEMinistry of Health · VN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn northern Vietnam the Neonatal health - Knowledge Into Practice (NeoKIP, Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN44599712) trial has evaluated facilitation as a knowledge translation intervention to improve neonatal survival. The results demonstrated that intervention sites, each having an assigned group including local stakeholders supported by a facilitator, lowered the neonatal mortality rate by 50% during the last intervention year compared with control sites. This process evaluation was conducted to identify and describe mechanisms of the NeoKIP intervention based on experiences of facilitators and intervention group members.

methodsFour focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with all facilitators at different occasions and 12 FGDs with 6 intervention groups at 2 occasions. Fifteen FGDs were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsFour themes and 17 sub-themes emerged from the 3 FGDs with facilitators, and 5 themes and 18 sub-themes were identified from the 12 FGDs with the intervention groups mirroring the process of, and the barriers to, the intervention. Facilitators and intervention group members concurred that having groups representing various organisations was beneficial. Facilitators were considered important in assembling the groups. The facilitators functioned best if coming from the same geographical area as the groups and if they were able to come to terms with the chair of the groups. However, the facilitators' lack of health knowledge was regarded as a deficit for assisting the groups' assignments. FGD participants experienced the NeoKIP intervention to have impact on the knowledge and behaviour of both intervention group members and the general public, however, they found that the intervention was a slow and time-consuming process. Perceived facilitation barriers were lack of money, inadequate support, and the function of the intervention groups.

conclusionsThis qualitative process evaluation contributes to explain the improved neonatal survival and why this occurred after a latent period in the NeoKIP project. The used knowledge translation intervention, where facilitators supported multi-stakeholder coalitions with the mandate to impact upon attitudes and behaviour in the communes, has low costs and potential for being scaled-up within existing healthcare systems.

Indexed as

Community Health CentersDeveloping CountriesInfant MortalityProgram EvaluationCommunicationCooperative BehaviorFocus GroupsHealth Plan ImplementationHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfant, NewbornPatient Acceptance of Health CareProblem SolvingQualitative ResearchTranslational Research, BiomedicalVietnam

Identifiers

PMID24330472
PMCPMC3866580
OpenAlexW2172081211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.