ArticleBJGP open2020
Parents' expectations and experiences of the 6-week baby check: a qualitative study in primary care.
Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethnic inequities in 6-8 week baby check coverage in England 2006- 2021: a cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- 'BMJ open · 2023Article
- Feeling the clunk: Managing and attributing uncertainty in screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip in infancy.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2022Article
- Understanding physician behaviour in the 6-8 weeks hip check in primary care: a qualitative study using the COM-B.BMJ open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Newborn and Infant Physical Examination (NIPE) programme requires all babies to have a comprehensive health check at 6-8 weeks of age. These are typically completed by GPs. Although person-centred care has achieved prominence in maternity care policy in recent years, there is limited empirical evidence on what parents and/or carers expect from the check, and how far experiences meet their needs.
aimTo explore the expectations and experiences of parents attending their GP for a baby check. DESIGN &
settingA qualitative study was undertaken in primary care in London.
methodContent analysis was undertaken of transcripts of semi-structured interviews. Interviews were conducted with a total of 16 participants (14 mothers and two fathers) who had recently attended for a 6-week check for their baby.
resultsDespite the availability of plentiful sources of general advice on infants' health and development, a thorough check by a trusted GP was an important milestone for most parents. They had few specific expectations of the check in terms of what examinations were undertaken, but even experienced parents anticipated reassurance about their baby's normal development. Many also hoped for reassurance about their own parenting. Parents appreciated GPs who explained what they were doing during the examination; space to raise any concerns; and combined mother and baby checks. Referrals to secondary care were generally experienced as reassuring rather than a source of anxiety.
conclusionThe baby check meets needs beyond those of the NIPE screening programme. Protecting the time for a thorough consultation is important for parents at what can be a vulnerable time.
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.