Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34708193›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2021

Early discharge of first-time parents and their newborn: A scoping review.

Victoria Lindblad, Pernille S Gaardsted, Dorte Melgaard

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of midwifery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

3 authors.

Victoria LindbladDepartment of Gynecology, Pregnancy and Childbirth, North Denmark Regional Hospital, Hjørring, Denmark.
Pernille S GaardstedMedical Library, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Dorte MelgaardCenter for Clinical Research, North Denmark Regional Hospital, Hjørring, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis scoping review aims to identify the evidence and the factors influencing the outcomes of early discharge of both healthy first-time mothers and newborns.

methodsSystematic searches were conducted using four databases up to February 2021, and a search for grey literature was performed. A total of 2030 articles were identified and reduced to 13 articles, and one article was added through chain search in reference lists. The aims of the identified studies, the methodology, participants, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the setting, context, and findings are summarized.

resultsA total of 14 studies were included. A thematic analysis identified the following factors influencing the outcomes of discharge within 24 hours after birth: parental education in pregnancy, perinatal information before discharge, sources of support, and follow-up strategies after discharge. Also, the analysis identified outcomes such as breastfeeding, parents' experience and readmission of the newborn that may be influenced when first-time parents are discharged within 24 hours after birth. Findings in this review highlight the importance of identifying factors and outcomes related to early discharge. However, because of the heterogeneity in methodology, terminology and assessment procedures used in the retrieved articles, the generalization of study results is limited.

conclusionsA gap in the literature about the outcomes of discharge within 24 hours after birth has been identified. Future studies with strong evidence are needed, defining criteria, context, and intervention.

Indexed as

early dischargeinfantlength of staypostnatal careprimiparity

Identifiers

PMID34708193
PMCPMC8504028

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.