ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2025
Teleconsultation Support for Obstetric Emergencies During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Rural Nepal: Results and Lessons Learned From a Mixed-Methods Study.
Article in Global health, science and practice, 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.
- Navigating Change, Sustaining Impact: GHSP's Mission in a Transformed Landscape.Global health, science and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In response to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, a nongovernmental organization in Nepal piloted a maternal and newborn health helpline program in partnership with the Government of Nepal and the Nepal Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The program connected service providers in remote areas with real-time clinical support during obstetric and neonatal emergencies via telephone consultations with clinical experts. 551 primary health care facilities across 14 districts of Nepal were included in the program and connected to a roster of 33 clinical expert volunteers from district or tertiary care hospitals. To assess the results of the program, we collected both quantitative and qualitative data, including monthly health facility record reviews from July 2020 to June 2021 and semi-structured interviews with clinical experts and service providers conducted in June 2021. Of the 551 health facilities included in the program, 160 facilities (29%) reported using the helpline during the study period, with 429 teleconsultation cases recorded. We found that 21% of these cases that otherwise would have been referred to a hospital were effectively managed by telephone on-site at rural health facilities, revealing the promising potential for impact using a low-tech solution. Of the health facilities that participated in the program, the helpline was predominantly used in remote facilities where access to higher-level referral centers for emergencies was limited. Feedback from both experts and service providers revealed that the program helped to improve clinical decision-making during emergencies, build confidence and skills of service providers, and improve referral efficiency. Implementation challenges included service providers' underreporting of helpline utilization, a lack of essential drugs at primary health care facilities, unreliable phone signals, and a lack of financial incentives for clinical experts. The results and implementation experiences shared in this article provide a template for the design and implementation of similar support programs for service providers managing clinical emergencies in rural contexts.
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.