Observational studyJournal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN2025
Integration of Peer Navigators Into Longitudinal Research.
Observational study in Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess consent rates and reasons for refusing consent after the introduction of peer navigators into the Outcomes of Babies With Opioid Exposure (OBOE) Study.
designSecondary analysis of data from the OBOE Study, a multisite observational study.
settingMedical centers in Alabama, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (N = 4).
participantsData about the use of peer navigators were obtained from the primary study, including 1,255 mothers or caregivers who were approached regarding participation in the study.
methodsWe used χ
resultsFollowing the addition of peer navigators, study consent rates significantly improved (29% of 852 before vs. 38% of 403 after; p = .001), and the percentage of potential participants who indicated that they were not interested in sharing information for research significantly decreased (41% of 247 vs. 26% of 115; p = .005).
conclusionWe demonstrate the potential effect of peer navigators on consent and interest in sharing information for research in a longitudinal research study. We recommend the inclusion of peer navigators in studies with high-risk populations.
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.