Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40259272›Full record

ArticleBMC pediatrics2025

Development and validation of an Arabic questionnaire to assess the knowledge of neonatal danger signs (AQ-KNDS) and its possible determinants among Arab population.

Esraa Abdellatif Hammouda, Suzan Abdel-Rahman, Marwa Abdelwahab Hassan, Marwa Abdelkarim, Engy Saad Abdelmoneim Elkaragy, Ayed A Shati, Ramy Mohamed Ghazy

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Esraa Abdellatif HammoudaClinical Reasearch Department, El-Raml Pediatric Hospital, Ministry of Health and Population, Alexandria, Egypt. Esraa.alatif@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3269-6623
Suzan Abdel-RahmanBiostatistics and Demography Department, Faculty of Graduate Studies for Statistical Research, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5779-0926
Marwa Abdelwahab HassanClinical Reasearch Department, El-Raml Pediatric Hospital, Ministry of Health and Population, Alexandria, Egypt.
Marwa AbdelkarimPediatric Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3957-3167
Engy Saad Abdelmoneim ElkaragyPediatric Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. engy.saad@alexmed.edu.eg.
Ayed A ShatiDepartment of Child Health, College of Medicine, King Khalid University, P.O. Box 641, Abha, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0444-5595
Ramy Mohamed GhazyFamily and Community Medicine Department, College of Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7611-706X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe neonatal period is the most dangerous time during which the newborn challenges the highest risk of death. This study aimed to develop a validated questionnaire to assess the knowledge of the population about neonatal danger signs (NDS) in Arab-speaking communities.

methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted; participants were recruited from the population visiting El-Raml Pediatric Hospital and El-Shatby Hospital in Alexandria in 2023.The study used Item Response Theory (IRT) techniques to evaluate the validity of the Arabic questionnaire. Various IRT models (1PL, 2PL, 3PLS) were employed to improve the scale's accuracy. To assess how the item response model fits the data, we used the M2 index and other fit indices (Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC)). Additionally, item fit indices including Pearson's χ2 and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) were measured to determine how well each item fits the final model. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reliability. Additionally, we utilized a logistic regression model to identify the predictors of knowledge of the NDS.

resultsA total of 283 participants were included, their mean age was 32.3 ± 8.62 years, 96.5% were female, 94.7% were currently married, 27.6% had a university or higher education, and 83.7% were of urban residence. The final questionnaire consists of 16 items. The best model was retained where its M2 statistics were comparatively low indicating that there was no significant difference between the model and the data (M2 = 84 with 88 degrees of freedom and a P = 0.688) with the following fit measures RMSEA = 0.001, AIC = 2650.04, BIC = 2825.7, and TLI and CFI were 1.0. Full information factor analysis indicated that the total proportion of variance extracted by the model was 63.7%. Multiple logistic regression indicated that the explanatory variables for the level of knowledge toward danger signs were female sex (AOR = 5.54, 95% CI:1.25-31.0, P = 0.034), age (AOR = 1.04. 95%CI:1.01-1.08, P = 0.025), and working outside the medical field (AOR = 3.26, 95%CI: 1.14-9.73, P = 0.034).

conclusionsThe developed questionnaire is valid and reliable in informing public health policymakers about community awareness regarding NDS and implementing interventions to improve neonatal health and reduce newborn morbidity and mortality rates.

Indexed as

ArabsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInfant, Newborn, DiseasesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultKnowledgeNeonatal danger signsReliabilityValidation

Identifiers

PMID40259272
PMCPMC12010550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.