ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2014
Mothers of babies enrolled in a randomized trial immediately after birth report a positive experience.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Continuous glucose monitoring in neonates: a review.Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology · 2017Review
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
objectiveRandomized trials are essential for improving outcomes, but researchers can be hesitant about undertaking clinical trials in newborn babies because of perceived vulnerability of the baby and risk of increasing parental anxiety. There is a paucity of evidence about the parental experience. We investigated mothers' experiences of having their newborn baby participate in a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial soon after birth. STUDY
designEligible mothers had consented to their baby's participation in the Sugar Babies Study. Mothers of potentially eligible babies were invited to join the study antenatally, but others were approached postnatally. Babies were enrolled in the study soon after birth and remained in the study for 48 h. After 2 weeks the birth mothers were interviewed by phone about their experience.
resultFour hundred and eighty-one mothers were enrolled, of whom 310 (64%) gave consent antenatally. All mothers were contacted and 477 (99%) were interviewed. The majority of mothers (458, 96%) reported they would consent to participating again, if they had another eligible baby, and 460 mothers (96%) reported they would recommend participation to family and friends. Nineteen mothers (4%) reported they did not like the heel lance blood tests, which were part of routine clinical care and not part of the trial protocol.
conclusionMost mothers reported the experience of having their newborn baby participate in a clinical trial as positive. Most negative responses were related to aspects of routine care rather than the trial protocol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24480902What 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.