ArticleBMC research notes2020
Evaluation of helping babies breathe and essential care for every baby training in southern nations nationalities and people's region, Ethiopia: applying a Kirkpatrick training evaluation model.
Article in BMC research notes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this evaluation was to assess the effectiveness of helping baby breathe (HBB) and essential care for every baby (ECEB) training program that has been implemented in southern nations nationalities and people's region (SNNPR), Ethiopia.
resultThe mean trainees' satisfaction score was 32.88 (SD ± 2.68). The majority (93.88%) of the trainees scored ≥ mean. All trainees expressed that all parts of the training were important but the updated parts of the training were most useful to them. The mean knowledge score of trainees for HBB training increased from 64.42 (SD ± 17.43) before the training to 80.71 (SD ± 14.36) after the training. The increment was statistically significant at p < 0.001. For ECEB training, the mean knowledge score of the trainees was increased from 59.10 (SD ± 13.18) before the training to 73.73 (SD ± 14.17) after the training. The improvement was statistically significant at p < 0.001.
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.