Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37863984›Full record

ReviewJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2024

Fundamentals of designing high-quality surveys: revisiting neonatal perinatal medicine survey applications.

Kadriye O Lewis, Howard W Kilbride, Carl Bose, David J Burchfield

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kadriye O LewisChildren's Mercy Kansas City, Department of Pediatrics, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA. kolewis@cmh.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5947-409X
Howard W KilbrideChildren's Mercy Kansas City, Department of Pediatrics, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3433-1444
Carl BoseUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
David J BurchfieldUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7209-5094

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surveys in neonatal perinatal medicine are practical instruments for gathering information about medical practices, and outcomes related to the care of newborns and infants. This includes research for identifying needs, assessing requirements, analyzing the effects of change, creating policies, and developing curriculum initiatives. Surveys also provide useful data for enhancing the provision of healthcare services, assessing medical specialties, and evaluating training programs. However, creating a high-quality survey can be difficult for many practitioners, particularly when deciding how to formulate the right questions, whether to utilize various types of questions and how best to arrange or format the survey tool for effective responses. Problems with design principles have been evident in many surveys submitted for dissemination to the members of the Section of Neonatal Perinatal Medicine (SoNPM). To prevent potential measurement errors and increase the quality of surveys, it is crucial to follow a systematic approach in developing surveys by adhering to the principles of effective survey design. This review article provides a brief summary of survey use within the SoNPM, and offers guidance for creating high-quality surveys, including identifying important factors to consider in survey development and characteristics of well-written and effective questions. We briefly note techniques that optimize survey design for distribution through digital media.

Indexed as

NeonatologyHumansInfant, NewbornPerinatal CarePerinatologyResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.