Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42026208›Full record

ReviewPediatric research2026

Kangaroo Care as an intervention in randomised controlled trials in neonatal intensive care.

Chiara Minotti, Lauren Wallis, Jennifer Hoesli, Chloé Schlaeppi, Emanuela Nyantakyi, Marie-Therese Schultes, Kerstin Jost, Julia Anna Bielicki

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Chiara MinottiPaediatric Research Centre, University Children's Hospital Basel UKBB, Basel, Switzerland. chiara.minotti@ukbb.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3941-9952
Lauren WallisCentre for Neonatal and Paediatric Infection, Institute for Infection & Immunity, City St. George's University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-1787-9025
Jennifer HoesliPaediatric Research Centre, University Children's Hospital Basel UKBB, Basel, Switzerland.
Chloé SchlaeppiPaediatric Research Centre, University Children's Hospital Basel UKBB, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-2195-2873
Emanuela NyantakyiInstitute for Implementation Science in Health Care, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7740-7680
Marie-Therese SchultesInstitute for Implementation Science in Health Care, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1593-3247
Kerstin JostDepartment of Clinical Research DKF, Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5634-0774
Julia Anna BielickiPaediatric Research Centre, University Children's Hospital Basel UKBB, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3902-5489

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Kangaroo Care (KC) is an evidence-based intervention, with greatest benefit when initiated early and provided for continuous periods, as recommended by the World Health Organization. However, uncertainty remains around KC operationalisation in research settings and how this may influence subsequent implementation in routine practice. We conducted a narrative synthesis of KC intervention characteristics reported in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), based on a prior systematic review and meta-analysis. We focused on elements relevant to implementation, including instructions for delivery, recommended equipment or environment, initiation timing, duration of skin-to-skin contact, and contraindications. Our synthesis shows that, even within RCTs, KC is frequently not delivered in line with WHO recommendations with respect to initiation timing, duration, and eligibility. This contributes to uncertainty in clinical target setting and reflects an implementation gap that mirrors challenges observed in routine care. Commonly reported barriers included infrastructural constraints, staffing and training requirements, and cultural factors influencing caregiver participation. These findings highlight that evidence of KC effectiveness alone is insufficient to ensure optimal delivery in practice. Implementation studies conducted in real-life settings are needed to determine whether observed benefits translate into routine care and to identify strategies that support timely initiation, sufficient duration, and sustained KC provision. IMPACT: Key intervention characteristics of Kangaroo Care (KC), such as instructions, environment, initiation timing, duration, and contraindications that are often insufficiently reported in randomised controlled trials, but critical for implementation. Even in RCTs, KC is frequently not delivered in accordance with WHO recommendations, highlighting uncertainty in clinical target setting and revealing an implementation gap that extends beyond routine clinical practice into research settings. By identifying recurring infrastructural, personnel, and cultural barriers across trials, this work informs the design of real-world effectiveness and implementation studies, including the ongoing NeoDeco effectiveness-implementation trial.

Identifiers

PMID42026208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.