ArticlePediatric research2023
A mixed methods study of perceptions of bias among neonatal intensive care unit staff.
Article in Pediatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implicit Bias in Health Professionals: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Beyond disclosure: setting standards for AI use in publishing in the journal Pediatric Research.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Staff perspectives on racial inequities in the neonatal intensive care unit: the REJOICE study.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- The Impact of Race and Ethnicity on Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia 1-Year Mortality.Pediatric pulmonology · 2025Article
- The role of cerebral oxygenation in pediatric lower respiratory tract infections based on insights from time domain near infrared spectroscopy tissue oximetry.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Association of early perioperative stroke after cardiothoracic surgery with intraoperative regional cerebral oxygenation using near-infrared spectroscopy: an observational cohort study comparing affected versus non-affected hemispheres.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Observational
- Equity, inclusion and cultural humility: contemporizing the neonatal intensive care unit family-centered care model.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Review
- Neuromonitoring in Children with Cerebrovascular Disorders.Neurocritical care · 2023Review
- Implementation of a Regional Oxygen Saturation Thought Algorithm and Association with Clinical Outcomes in Pediatric Patients Following Cardiac Surgery.Pediatric cardiology · 2023Article
- Caregiver and Provider Perceptions of Health Disparities in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Qualitative Study.Academic pediatricsArticle
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInequity in neonatology may be potentiated within neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) by the effects of bias. Addressing bias can lead to improved, more equitable care. Understanding perceptions of bias can inform targeted interventions to reduce the impact of bias. We conducted a mixed methods study to characterize the perceptions of bias among NICU staff.
methodsSurveys were distributed to all staff (N = 245) in a single academic Level IV NICU. Respondents rated the impact of bias on their own and others' behaviors on 5-point Likert scales and answered one open-ended question. Kruskal-Wallis test (KWT) and Levene's test were used for quantitative analysis and thematic analysis was used for qualitative analysis.
resultsWe received 178 responses. More respondents agreed that bias had a greater impact on others' vs. their own behaviors (KWT p < 0.05). Respondents agreed that behaviors were influenced more by implicit than explicit biases (KWT p < 0.05). Qualitative analysis resulted in nine unique themes.
conclusionsStaff perceive a high impact of bias across different domains with increased perceived impact of implicit vs. explicit bias. Staff perceive a greater impact of others' biases vs. their own. Mixed methods studies can help identify unique, unit-responsive approaches to reduce bias. IMPACT: Healthcare staff have awareness of bias and its impact on their behaviors with patients, families, and staff. Healthcare staff believe that implicit bias impacts their behaviors more than explicit bias, and that they have less bias than others. Healthcare staff have ideas for strategies and approaches to mitigate the impact of bias. Mixed method studies are effective ways of understanding environment-specific perceptions of bias, and contextual assets and barriers when creating interventions to reduce bias and improve equity. Generating interventions to reduce the impact of bias in healthcare requires a context-specific understanding of perceptions of bias among staff.
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.