ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2024
Use of digital technologies for staff education and training programmes on newborn resuscitation and complication management: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An innovative, digital approach to training district health care providers on essential newborn care skills: findings from a pilot cluster-randomised trial in Lao People's Democratic Republic.Journal of global health · 2025Trial
- Digital Health Interventions in Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care Services in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoor-quality care is linked to higher rates of neonatal mortality in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Limited educational and upskilling opportunities for healthcare professionals, particularly those who work in remote areas, are key barriers to providing quality neonatal care. Novel digital technologies, including mobile applications and virtual reality, can help bridge this gap. This scoping review aims to identify, analyse and compare available digital technologies for staff education and training to improve newborn care.
methodsWe conducted a structured search of seven databases (MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), EMCARE (Ovid), Global Health (CABI), CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Index Medicus (WHO) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on 1 June 2023. Eligible studies were those that aimed to improve healthcare providers' competency in newborn resuscitation and management of sepsis or respiratory distress during the early postnatal period. Studies published in English from 1 January 2000 onwards were included. Data were extracted using a predefined data extraction format.
resultsThe review identified 93 eligible studies, of which 35 were conducted in LMICs. E-learning platforms and mobile applications were common technologies used in LMICs for neonatal resuscitation training. Digital technologies were generally well accepted by trainees. Few studies reported on the long-term effects of these tools on healthcare providers' education or on neonatal health outcomes. Limited studies reported on costs and other necessary resources to maintain the educational intervention.
conclusionsLower-cost digital methods such as mobile applications, simulation games and/or mobile mentoring that engage healthcare providers in continuous skills practice are feasible methods for improving neonatal resuscitation skills in LMICs. To further consider the use of these digital technologies in resource-limited settings, assessments of the resources to sustain the intervention and the effectiveness of the digital technologies on long-term health provider performance and neonatal health outcomes are required.
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.