Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39316424›Full record

ArticleJMIR pediatrics and parenting2024

Perceived Acceptability of Technology Modalities for the Provision of Universal Child and Family Health Nursing Support in the First 6-8 Months After Birth: Cross-Sectional Study.

Tessa Delaney, Jacklyn K Jackson, Alison L Brown, Christophe Lecathelinais, Luke Wolfenden, Nayerra Hudson, Sarah Young, Daniel Groombridge, Jessica Pinfold, Paul David Craven and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR pediatrics and parenting, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Breastfeeding and Early Infant Feeding Practices Among Women in the Hunter New England Region of New South Wales, Australia: A Cross Sectional Study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Tessa DelaneyHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2756-4821
Jacklyn K JacksonHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7633-0418
Alison L BrownHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4233-7467
Christophe LecathelinaisHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8931-473X
Luke WolfendenHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6178-3868
Nayerra HudsonHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0069-1564
Sarah YoungHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8808-1138
Daniel GroombridgeHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8393-6431
Jessica PinfoldHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4308-9430
Paul David CravenHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5343-0893
Sinead RedmanHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8960-5568
John WiggersHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6361-9685
Melanie KingslandHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4744-8465
Margaret HayesHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7979-3785
Rachel SutherlandHunter New England Local Health District, New Lambton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0470-7663

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChild and Family Health Nursing (CFHN) services provide universal care to families during the first 2000 days (conception: 5 years) to support optimal health and developmental outcomes of children in New South Wales, Australia. The use of technology represents a promising means to encourage family engagement with CFHN services and enable universal access to evidenced-based age and stage information. Currently, there is little evidence exploring the acceptability of various models of technology-based support provided during the first 2000 days, as well as the maternal characteristics that may influence this.

objectiveThis study aims to describe (1) the acceptability of technology-based models of CFHN support to families in the first 6 months, and (2) the association between the acceptability of technology-based support and maternal characteristics.

methodsA cross-sectional survey was undertaken between September and November 2021 with women who were 6-8 months post partum within the Hunter New England Local Health District of New South Wales, Australia. Survey questions collected information on maternal demographics and pregnancy characteristics, perceived stress, access to CFHN services, as well as preferences and acceptability of technology-based support. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the sample, the proportion of women accessing CFHN services, maternal acceptability of technology-based support from CFHN services, and the appropriateness of timing of support. Multivariable logistic regression models were conducted to assess the association between maternal characteristics and the acceptability of technology-based CFHN support.

resultsA total of 365 women participated in the study, most were 25 to 34 years old (n=242, 68%), had completed tertiary level education or higher (n=250, 71%), and were employed or on maternity leave (n=280, 78%). Almost all (n=305, 89%) women reported accessing CFHN services in the first 6 months following their child's birth. The majority of women (n=282-315, 82%-92%) "strongly agreed or agreed" that receiving information from CFHN via technology would be acceptable, and most (n=308) women "strongly agreed or agreed" with being provided information on a variety of relevant health topics. Acceptability of receiving information via websites was significantly associated with maternal employment status (P=.01). The acceptability of receiving support via telephone and email was significantly associated with maternal education level (adjusted odds ratio 2.64, 95% CI 1.07-6.51; P=.03 and adjusted odds ratio 2.90, 95% CI 1.20-7.00; P=.02, respectively). Maternal age was also associated with the acceptability of email support (P=.04).

conclusionsTechnology-based CFHN support is generally acceptable to mothers. Maternal characteristics, including employment status, education level, and age, were found to modify the acceptability of specific technology modalities. The findings of this research should be considered when designing technology-based solutions to providing universal age and stage child health and developmental support for families during the first 2000 days.

Indexed as

acceptabilityacceptanceattitudeattitudesbabiesbabychild healthcross sectionaldigital healthexperienceexperiencesfirst 2000 daysinfancyinfantinfantsmaternalneonatalneonateneonatesnewbornnewbornsnursenursesnursingopinionpediatricpediatricsperceptionperceptionsperspectiveperspectivespostnatalpostpartumquestionnairequestionnairessurveysurveystechnology

Identifiers

PMID39316424
PMCPMC11462103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.