Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30849125›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Implementing the INTERGROWTH-21st gestational dating and fetal and newborn growth standards in peri-urban Nairobi, Kenya: Provider experiences, uptake and clinical decision-making.

Linda Vesel, Kojo Nimako, Rachel M Jones, Meghan Munson, Sarah Little, Henry Njogu, Irene Njuru, Teresa Ogolla, Grace Kimenju, Mary Nell Wegner and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Implementation of the INTERGROWTH-21Global health action · 2020
    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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Linda VeselDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3753-4172
Kojo NimakoDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Rachel M JonesJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Meghan MunsonJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Sarah LittleJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Henry NjoguJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Irene NjuruJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Teresa OgollaJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Grace KimenjuJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Mary Nell WegnerDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Sathyanath RajasekharanJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Nicholas PearsonJacaranda Health, Nairobi, Kenya.
Ana LangerDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Harvard Global Health Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerinatal and newborn complications are major risk factors for unfavorable fetal and neonatal outcomes. Gestational dating and growth monitoring can be instrumental in the identification and management of high-risk pregnancies and births. The INTERGROWTH-21st Project developed the first global standards for gestational dating and fetal and newborn growth monitoring, supplying a toolkit for clinicians. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the first known implementation study of these standards in a low resource setting.

methodsThe study was performed in two 12-month phases from March 2016 to March 2018 at Jacaranda Health, a private maternity hospital in peri-urban Nairobi, Kenya. In-depth interviews, focus group discussions and a provider survey were utilized to evaluate providers' experiences during implementation. Client chart data, for pregnant women attending antenatal care and/or delivering at Jacaranda Health along with their newborns, were captured to assess uptake and effect of the standards on clinical decision-making.

resultsFacility-level support and provider buy-in proved to be critical factors driving the success of implementing the standards. However, additional support was needed to strengthen capacity to conduct and interpret ultrasounds and maintain motivation among providers. We observed a significant increase in the uptake of obstetric ultrasounds, particularly gestational dating, during the implementation of the standards. Although no significant changes were detected in the identification of high-risk pregnancies, referrals and deliveries by Cesarean section during implementation, we did observe a significant reduction in inductions for post-date. No significant barriers were reported regarding the use of the newborn standards. Over 80% of providers advocated for the standards to remain in place with some enhancements related mainly to training, advocacy and procurement.

conclusionsThe findings are timely with increasing global adoption of the standards and the challenging and multi-faceted nature of translating new, evidence-based guidelines into routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Fetal DevelopmentGrowth ChartsBirth WeightClinical Decision-MakingFemaleFetal MonitoringGestational AgeHealth PersonnelHumansInfant, NewbornKenyaPregnancyPrenatal CareSurveys and QuestionnairesUltrasonography, Prenatal

Identifiers

PMID30849125
PMCPMC6407840
OpenAlexW2922496093

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.