Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33765959›Full record

Observational studyBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Birthweight measurement processes and perceived value: qualitative research in one EN-BIRTH study hospital in Tanzania.

Miriam E Gladstone, Nahya Salim, Karama Ogillo, Donat Shamba, Georgia R Gore-Langton, Louise T Day, Hannah Blencowe, Joy E Lawn, EN-BIRTH Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Birthweight: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021
    Observational
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Miriam E Gladstone *Centre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK.
Nahya Salim *Department of Health Systems, Impact Evaluation and Policy, Ifakara Health Institute (IHI), Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Karama OgilloDepartment of Health Systems, Impact Evaluation and Policy, Ifakara Health Institute (IHI), Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Donat ShambaDepartment of Health Systems, Impact Evaluation and Policy, Ifakara Health Institute (IHI), Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Georgia R Gore-LangtonCentre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK.
Louise T DayCentre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK.
Hannah BlencoweCentre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK.
Joy E LawnCentre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK. joy.lawn@lshtm.ac.uk.
EN-BIRTH Study Group
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBIfakara Health Institute · TZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobally an estimated 20.5 million liveborn babies are low birthweight (LBW) each year, weighing less than 2500 g. LBW babies have increased risk of mortality even beyond the neonatal period, with an ongoing risk of stunting and non-communicable diseases. LBW is a priority global health indicator. Now almost 80% of births are in facilities, yet birthweight data are lacking in most high-mortality burden countries and are of poor quality, notably with heaping especially on values ending in 00. We aimed to undertake qualitative research in a regional hospital in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, observing birthweight weighing scales, exploring barriers and enablers to weighing at birth as well as perceived value of birthweight data to health workers, women and stakeholders.

methodsObservations were undertaken on type of birthweight scale availability in hospital wards. In-depth semi-structured interviews (n = 21) were conducted with three groups: women in postnatal and kangaroo mother care wards, health workers involved in birthweight measurement and recording, and stakeholders involved in data aggregation in Temeke Hospital, Tanzania, a site in the EN-BIRTH study. An inductive thematic analysis was undertaken of translated interview transcripts.

resultsOf five wards that were expected to have scales, three had functional scales, and only one of the functional scales was digital. The labour ward weighed the most newborns using an analogue scale that was not consistently zeroed. Hospital birthweight data were aggregated monthly for reporting into the health management information system. Birthweight measurement was highly valued by all respondents, notably families and healthcare workers, and local use of data was considered an enabler. Perceived barriers to high quality birthweight data included: gaps in availability of precise weighing devices, adequate health workers and imprecise measurement practices.

conclusionBirthweight measurement is valued by families and health workers. There are opportunities to close the gap between the percentage of babies born in facilities and the percentage accurately weighed at birth by providing accurate scales, improving skills training and increasing local use of data. More accurate birthweight data are vitally important for all babies and specifically to track progress in preventing and improving immediate and long-term care for low birthweight children.

Indexed as

Birth WeightInfant, Low Birth WeightAdultData AccuracyFemaleGestational AgeHealth Information SystemsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHospitalsHumansInfant, NewbornMiddle AgedPerinatal CarePregnancyProfessional Practice GapsQualitative ResearchBirthBirthweightCoverageHospitalMaternalNeonatalWeighing scale

Identifiers

PMID33765959
PMCPMC7995566
OpenAlexW3136806554

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.