Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35657804›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Midwifery-led researches for evidence-based practice: Clinical midwives engagement in research in Ethiopia, 2021.

Keflie Yohannes Gebresilassie, Adhanom Gebreegziabher Baraki, Belayneh Ayanaw Kassie, Sintayehu Daba Wami

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Keflie Yohannes GebresilassieMidwifery Directorate, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0001-7348-7938
Adhanom Gebreegziabher BarakiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Belayneh Ayanaw KassieMidwifery Directorate, School of Midwifery, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Sintayehu Daba WamiDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
University of Gondar · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHealth workers involvement in research had an impact on studies and whole system. They influence the clinical practice and help to implement evidences. Although International Confederation of Midwives (ICM) put research as one of the midwifery competencies and professional development activity, clinical midwives are poorly involved in research. Therefore, this study is aimed to assess clinical midwives engagement in research and bridge the gap through applicable strategies.

methodInstitution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among clinical midwives working at public health facilities of Central and North Gondar Zone, Ethiopia from September to October, 2020 G.C. A structured and pre-tested self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data and entered into Epi-info version 7. Descriptive statistics was used to describe study population. Bi-variable and multi-variable logistic regression analysis was performed using STATA Version 14 and significance level declared at 95% confidence interval, p-value ≤ 0.05 and respective odds ratios.

resultOut of 335 clinical midwives, 314 were participated making the response rate 93.7%. Among the midwives, one hundred seventy two (54.8%) (95% CI: 49.08%, 60.37) have good skill on conducting a research. Clinical midwives with mothers with formal education [AOR: 1.90, 95% CI: (1.03, 3.51), currently work on referral hospitals [AOR: 2.33, 95% CI: (1.19, 4.53)] and having good level of knowledge on research [AOR: 2.19, 95% CI: (1.25, 3.82)] have significant association with having good research skill. Forty eight (15.2%) (95% CI: 11.5%, 19.7%) ever participated in research during their clinical practice. Clinical midwives who have good knowledge on research [AOR: 0.31, 95% CI: (0.14, 0.70)] are about 0.3 times less likely to participate on research than who have poor knowledge [AOR: 0.31, 95% CI: (0.14, 0.70)]. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Although more than half have good research skill, only a small proportion of midwives were involved in research. Capacity building activities are crucial to strengthen midwives skill on research and ensure their involvement.

Indexed as

MidwiferyCross-Sectional StudiesEthiopiaEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHealth FacilitiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansPregnancySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35657804
PMCPMC9165898
OpenAlexW4281774097

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.