ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Quantifying neonatal transport deficiencies: an integrated framework for weighting core KPIs and ranking challenges in resource-limited settings.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neonatal and Pediatric Transport: A Contemporary Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health systems often struggle to deploy an adequate number of trained healthcare professionals at the right time and place. These constraints underscore the critical role of efficient referral and transport processes, particularly for critically ill neonates. This study aimed to develop a strategic, data-driven framework to guide system-wide improvement within neonatal transfer systems. A mixed-methods approach was adopted. Qualitatively, a literature review and semi-structured interviews with experts experienced in neonatal transfer were conducted to identify contextual challenges and relevant key performance indicators (KPIs). Quantitatively, a structured survey was then administered to elicit weights for the KPIs and to prioritize the challenges. The analysis was supported by three Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Techniques: the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL), the Analytic Network Process (ANP), and the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Key performance indicators (KPIs) were weighted as follows: Total Transport Time (0.20), Stabilization Care (0.18), In-Transport or 24-h Mortality (0.16), Patient Arrest During Transport (0.12), Medical Gas Supplies (0.10), Medical Equipment Failure (0.09), Accidental Extubation (0.08), and Hypoglycemia (0.06). Based on these weights, the five most critical challenges were: inadequate equipment, low skill level of the transfer team, lack of a centralized transport unit, unclear exchange of information, and transport models constrained by administrative structures.
conclusionThe proposed framework enhances transparency and defensibility in neonatal transport decision-making. By directing resources toward high-impact domains, it supports improved patient outcomes and reduced system risks. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Previous studies on neonatal transport identify challenges and propose KPIs but often lack prioritization of interventions. • Research relies mainly on qualitative methods with limited quantitative analysis and is highly specific to the country or context of the study. WHAT IS NEW: • By integrating qualitative and quantitative methods, this study identifies challenges and core KPIs of the neonatal transport system, assesses their relative weight, and ranks challenges to guide evidence-based resource allocation. • It provides policymakers with a framework for prioritizing system improvements in any context, including resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41083804What 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.