ArticlePediatric research2024
Record, reflect and refine: using video review as an initiative to improve neonatal care.
Article in Pediatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neonatal video review practices across the US: capturing utilization and barriers.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- International Multicenter Video Review on Neonatal Procedures: Lessons Learned from a Collaborative Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of the Neonatal Resuscitation Video Review program for neonatal staff: a qualitative analysis.Pediatric research · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe goal of every medical team is to provide optimal care for their patients. We aimed to use video review (VR) sessions to identify and address areas for improvement in neonatal care.
methodsFor nine months, neonatal procedures (stabilization at birth, intubations and sterile line insertions) were video recorded and reviewed with the neonatal care providers. Action research was used to identify and address areas for improvement which were categorized as (1) protocol/equipment adjustments, (2) input for research, (3) aspects of variety, or (4) development of educational material or training programs.
resultsEighteen VR sessions were organized with a mean(SD) of 17(5) staff members participating. In total, 120 areas for improvement were identified and addressed, of which 84/120 (70%) were categorized as aspects of variety, 20/120 (17%) as development of educational material or training programs, 10/120 (8%) as protocol/equipment adjustments, and 6/120 (5%) as input for research. The areas for improvement were grouped in themes per category, including sterility, technique, equipment, communication, teamwork, parents' perspective and ventilation.
conclusionOur study showed that regularly organized VR empowered healthcare providers to identify and address a large variety of areas for improvement, contributing to continuous learning and improvement processes. IMPACT: Video review empowered healthcare providers to identify areas for improvement in neonatal care Video review gave providers the opportunity to address identified areas for improvement, either by enhancing the application of external evidence (i.e. guidelines), learning from individual clinical expertise or strengthening resilience and teamwork Embedding regularly organized video review sessions allowed for continuous monitoring of care by providers, which can be beneficial for creating ongoing learning and improvement processes The structured pathways, supporting implementation of changes that were proposed based on the video review sessions, could help other centers make use of the potential video review has to offer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38356026What 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.