ArticleMaternal and child health journal2020
Assessing the Development of Collective Impact Initiatives Addressing Maternal and Child Health.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The multidisciplinary and participatory process to develop the Rubric for Learning Communities about Health Approaches.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- [In-depth methods for optimizing learning communities: development and application experiences].TSG : tijdschrift voor gezondheidswetenschappen · 2025Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine the extent to which communities participating in the Collective Impact Learning Collaborative (CILC) increased capacity to create conditions for collective impact (CI) to address racial disparities in maternal and child health (MCH) and align local efforts with state MCH priorities over a 12-month period. DESCRIPTION: Eight communities participated in a learning collaborative that involved the provision of technical assistance via webinars, monthly team calls, and site visits to facilitate the development of a collective impact initiative. A Ready-Set-Go approach to technical assistance was used to guide the communities through each phase of development while also providing individual assistance to teams based on their capacity at the start of participation. ASSESSMENT: A pre/post design measured change in capacity to engage in CI efforts over time. A survey designed to assess the completion of core tasks related to early indicators of CI was completed at baseline and 12 months later. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test and Mann-Whitney test determined statistically significant progress towards outcomes over 12 months and differences in progress between high- and low- capacity teams.
conclusionIn 12 months, teams with little established groundwork made significant progress, in some ways exceeding progress of more established teams. Statistically significant progress was achieved in eleven of fourteen outcomes measured. Five teams aligned local efforts with state priorities after 12 months. Findings suggest technical assistance to establish conditions for collective impact can support progress even when pre-conditions for collective impact are not previously established.
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.