ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem
Validation of the content of the prevention protocol for early sepsis caused by Streptococcus agalactiaein newborns.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Streptococcus agalactiae in pregnant women in Brazil: prevalence, serotypes, and antibiotic resistance.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2019Review
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
objectiveto validate the content of the prevention protocol for early sepsis caused by Streptococcus agalactiaein newborns.
methoda transversal, descriptive and methodological study, with a quantitative approach. The sample was composed of 15 judges, 8 obstetricians and 7 pediatricians. The validation occurred through the assessment of the content of the protocol by the judges that received the instrument for data collection - checklist - which contained 7 items that represent the requisites to be met by the protocol. The validation of the content was achieved by applying the Content Validity Index.
resultin the judging process, all the items that represented requirements considered by the protocol obtained concordance within the established level (Content Validity Index > 0.75). Of 7 items, 6 have obtained full concordance (Content Validity Index 1.0) and the feasibility item obtained a Content Validity Index of 0.93. The global assessment of the instruments obtained a Content Validity Index of 0.99.
conclusionthe validation of content that was done was an efficient tool for the adjustment of the protocol, according to the judgment of experienced professionals, which demonstrates the importance of conducting a previous validation of the instruments. It is expected that this study will serve as an incentive for the adoption of universal tracking by other institutions through validated protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.