Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26334399›Full record

SynthesisJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2016

United States and territory policies supporting maternal and neonatal transfer: review of transport and reimbursement.

E M Okoroh, C D Kroelinger, S M Lasswell, D A Goodman, A M Williams, W D Barfield

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Summary of neonatal and maternal transport and reimbursement policies-a 5-year update.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Perinatal outcomes for rural obstetric patients and neonates in rural-located and metropolitan-located hospitals.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Regionalization of neonatal care: benefits, barriers, and beyond.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022
    Review
  13. Seven years later: state neonatal risk-appropriate care policy consistency with the 2012 American Academy of Pediatrics Policy.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022
    Article
  14. Urban-rural differences in pregnancy-related deaths, United States, 2011-2016.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Why so little progress in regionalization of perinatal care when transport of high-risk neonates remains a substantial risk?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Comparison of state risk-appropriate neonatal care policies with the 2012 AAP policy statement.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2018
    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

6 authors.

E M OkorohDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
C D KroelingerDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
S M LasswellIndependent Consultant, Mosaic Consulting Group, LLC, Atlanta, GA, USA.
D A GoodmanDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
A M WilliamsIndependent Consultant, Mosaic Consulting Group, LLC, Atlanta, GA, USA.
W D BarfieldDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSummarize policies that support maternal and neonatal transport among states and territories. STUDY

designSystematic review of publicly available, web-based information on maternal and neonatal transport for each state and territory in 2014. Information was abstracted from published rules, statutes, regulations, planning documents and program descriptions. Abstracted information was summarized within two categories: transport and reimbursement.

resultsSixty-eight percent of states and 25% of territories had a policy for neonatal transport; 60% of states and one territory had a policy for maternal transport. Sixty-two percent of states had a reimbursement policy for neonatal transport, whereas 20% reimbursed for maternal transport. Thirty-two percent of states had an infant back-transport policy while 16% included back-transport for both. No territories had reimbursement or back-transport policies.

conclusionThe lack of development of maternal transport reimbursement and neonatal back-transport policies negatively impacts the achievements of risk-appropriate care, a strategy focused on improving perinatal outcomes.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansInfant, NewbornInsurance, Health, ReimbursementPerinatal CarePregnancyTransportation of PatientsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26334399
PMCPMC4856146

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.