ArticleBMJ open2025
Delayed cord clamping in China: a cross-sectional survey of clinical practices and perceptions in Jiangsu Province.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo understand the awareness and practice of delayed cord clamping (DCC) among obstetric medical staff in Jiangsu Province.
designCross-sectional study.
settingObstetricians and midwives practising in Jiangsu Province, China.
participantsThe online survey was created using the Wenjuanxing app and distributed through hospital administrators to WeChat groups of obstetricians and midwives for participation. OUTCOME: The questionnaire includes 28 items covering the respondents' basic information, their knowledge and understanding of DCC, and its implementation status. Data analysis was based on frequencies and descriptive statistics.
resultsA total of 1001 people completed and submitted the questionnaire, with 866 included in the detailed analysis. This included 460 obstetricians (53.1%) and 406 midwives (46.9%). Among them, 50.7% reported being very familiar with DCC, and 49.3% reported being somewhat familiar with DCC. The overall routine implementation rate of DCC was 81.2%, with midwives (91.4%) having a significantly higher implementation rate than obstetricians (72.2%). In cases of caesarean section (89.8%), preterm birth (82.9%) and twin or multiple births (61.5%), most respondents chose to implement DCC. In cases of maternal infectious diseases, fewer chose to implement DCC: hepatitis B (31.9%), syphilis (24.4%) and HIV (18.4%). The main reasons for not implementing DCC were maternal bleeding or other emergencies (92.7%) and the need for neonatal resuscitation (88.8%).
conclusionThe awareness and implementation rate of DCC among obstetric medical staff in Jiangsu Province are relatively high, but there are differences in specific details of cognition and practice, and no standard protocols have been formed. The application of DCC should continue to be promoted, and the early introduction of localised practice guidelines and standards should be advocated.
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.