SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2024
The case of the neonate vs. LMIC medical academia-a jury-style systematic review of 32 years of literature without significant mortality reduction.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The high neonatal mortality rate in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Nigeria has lasted for more than 30 years to date with associated nursing fatigue. Despite prominent hard work, technological improvements, and many publications released from the country since 1990, the problem has persisted, perhaps due to a lack of intervention scale-up. Could there be neglected discoveries unwittingly abandoned by Nigerian policymakers over the years, perhaps locked up in previous publications? A careful review may reveal these insights to alert policymakers, inspire researchers, and refocus in-country research efforts towards impactful directions for improving neonatal survival rates. The focus was to determine the prevailed effectiveness of LMIC medical academia in creating solutions to end the high neonatal mortality rate. Methods: An unconventional systematic review protocol structure following the PRISMA 2020 checklist was designed and registered at INPLASY (registration number: INPLASY202380096, doi: 10.37766/inplasy2023.8.0096). A jury of paediatricians was assembled and observed by a team of legal professionals. The jury searched the literature from 1990 to the end of 2022, extracted newborn-related articles about Nigeria, and assessed and debated them against expected criteria for solution creation, translation, scale-up, sustainability, and national coverage. Each juror used preset criteria to produce a verdict on the possibility of a published novel idea being a potential game-changer for improving the survival rate of Nigerian neonates. Results: A summation of the results showed that 19 out of 4,286 publications were assessed to possess potential strategies or interventions to reduce neonatal mortality. Fourteen were fully developed but not appropriately scaled up across the country, hence denying neonates proper access to these interventions. Conclusion: Nigeria may already have the required game-changing ideas to strategically scale up across the nation to accelerate neonatal survival. Therefore, LMIC healthcare systems may have to look inward to strengthen what they already possess. Systematic Review Registration: https://inplasy.com/, identifier (INPLASY202380096).
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.