ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2019
Field assessment of a safe sleep instrument using smartphone technology.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2019. 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.
- Evaluating Educational Patterns and Methods in Infant Sleep Care: Trends, Effectiveness, and Impact in Home Settings-A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Using Social Vulnerability Indices to Predict Priority Areas for Prevention of Sudden Unexpected Infant Death in Cook County, IL: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Beyond Risk Factors.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
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
introductionSudden unexpected infant death is the leading cause of infant mortality with black: white infant mortality remaining at 2:1 for the last decade. Smartphone technology provides a convenient and accessible tool for injury prevention anticipatory guidance among at-risk communities. MATERIALS AND
methodsA convenience sample of pregnant teen mothers who own a smartphone. During a 1-month postnatal home visit, a safe sleep environment survey was administered, infant sleep practices were observed, and mothers trained to take and submit standard infants' sleep environment photographs. Photographs were independently assessed for inter-rater reliability (IRR) across five sleep safety domains (primary outcome): sleep location, surface, position, presence of soft items, and hazards near the sleep area. Expert and novice coders IRR was measured using Cohen's kappa coefficient (K). Sleep safety correlation between photographs and observation, and parent report and observation was determined.
resultsSixteen (57.1%) mothers completed the home visit. Most parents reported infants sleeping supine (78.5) in parents' bedroom (85.9%). Photographs demonstrated sleep position, soft items without the baby present, and hanging toys had perfect agreement across all three coder pairs. Safe sleep experts' IRR demonstrated perfect agreement for sleep location, position, and soft items. While 83.8% of parents were observed putting their infants down to sleep on their back, 78.5% of parents reported doing the same and 82.4% of the photographs demonstrated supine infant sleep position.
conclusionUsing photographs, coders can reliably categorize some key infant sleep safety aspects, and photograph sleep safety is comparable to parent report and direct observation.
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.