Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29317380›Full record

ReviewJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

Effectiveness and Appropriateness of mHealth Interventions for Maternal and Child Health: Systematic Review.

Huan Chen, Yanling Chai, Le Dong, Wenyi Niu, Puhong Zhang

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 12 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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Improving Breastfeeding by Empowering Mothers in Vietnam: A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Mobile App.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Trial

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Huan Chen *The George Institute for Global Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4125-0666
Yanling Chai *The George Institute for Global Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4392-0080
Le DongThe George Institute for Global Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8322-3554
Wenyi NiuSchool of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4987-7981
Puhong ZhangThe George Institute for Global Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4610-9848

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe application of mobile health (mHealth) technology in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH) is increasing worldwide. However, best practice and the most effective mHealth interventions have not been reviewed systematically.

objectiveA systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of mHealth interventions for RMNCH around the world were conducted to investigate their characteristics as well as the features and effectiveness of mHealth interventions.

methodsStudies of mHealth interventions for RMNCH between January 2011 and December 2016 were retrieved from 6 databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Global Health, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, and Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Medium). Comparable studies were included in a random-effects meta-analysis for both exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) and antenatal checks (ANC). Descriptive analyses were conducted for mHealth studies with a range of study designs.

resultsAnalyses of 245 studies were included, including 51 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results showed that there are increasing numbers of studies on mHealth interventions for RMNCH. Although 2 meta-analysis, one with 2 RCTs on EBF (odds ratio [OR] 2.03, 95% CI 1.34-3.08, I

conclusionsMore rigorous evaluations are needed to draw consistent conclusions and to analyze mHealth products with multiple functions, especially those popular in the app markets.

Indexed as

child healthmaternal healthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID29317380
PMCPMC5780618

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.