ReviewMaternal health, neonatology and perinatology2025
Retention of knowledge and skills among midwives one year after completing helping babies breathe pre-service training in Ethiopia: a non-randomized quasi-experimental study.
Review in Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of high-fidelity simulation on clinical readiness among Thai undergraduate nursing-midwifery students: a mixed-method study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Long-term knowledge and skills retention following Helping Mothers Survive and Helping Babies Survive training in Tanzania: a mixed-methods follow-up study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeonatal mortality remains a significant public health challenge in Ethiopia, often attributed to asphyxia at birth. Helping Babies Breathe (HBB), an evidence-based neonatal resuscitation program aims to address this issue. However, the sustainability of knowledge and skills acquired during pre-service training is less understood.
objectiveThis study assessed the retention of knowledge and skills among midwives one year after completing the HBB pre-service training in Ethiopia.
methodsA non-randomized quasi-experimental study was conducted involving a cohort of midwifery graduates who completed HBB training during their final year. Knowledge was assessed using a multiple-choice questionnaire, while skills were evaluated using Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Data were collected immediately post-training, six months later, and one year later. Paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to analyze changes over time.
resultsOf the 60 midwives initially trained, 50 (83.3%) participated in the follow-up assessment. The median knowledge score decreased significantly from 98% immediately post-training to 74% one year later (p < 0.01). Similarly, OSCE performance declined, with 36% of participants demonstrating proficiency compared to 62% at baseline (p < 0.05). A paired t-test was performed to evaluate whether students' psychomotor skills significantly declined 12 months after initial training. The results of the analysis showed a highly significant decline in psychomotor skills during this time, with a mean difference of -2.29 (SE = 0.29; p < 0.001). This negative mean difference, with pre-test scores averaging 27.59 (SD = 2.78) and post-test scores after 12 months averaging 25.31 (SD = 2.11), indicates a noticeable drop in skill levels following training.
conclusionWhile midwives retained moderate knowledge and skills one year after completing HBB training, significant attrition highlights the need for periodic refresher training and improved access to resuscitation tools. Strengthening these aspects may enhance the long-term impact of HBB in reducing neonatal mortality.
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.