ArticleJournal of global health2026
Stillbirth and newborn data quality and use and related input and process factors: findings of the IMPULSE study in Uganda.
Article in Journal of global health, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The reduction of preventable newborn deaths in low- and middle-income countries is a global priority. The availability of high-quality newborn and stillbirth data is essential for shaping action-oriented policies and interventions towards resolving these challenges. Using a mixed-methods approach, we evaluated the input and process factors hindering data quality and use in Uganda. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study from November 2022 to September 2023 across three regions and one city administration in Uganda (51 sites, 30 facilities, 20 district health offices (DHOs), and a Ministry of Health). We collected data primarily through direct observation based on standardised Every Newborn - Measurement Improvement for Newborn & Stillbirth Indicators tools and analysed them using the Performance of Routine Information System Management framework. We synthesised data quality, data use, and their technical, organisational, and behavioural determinants using sub-domain level indicators designed to provide a novel approach for policymakers. Results: Newborn data availability and completeness were high, with denominator elements exceeding 90% at all levels and numerator elements at facility level ranging from 86% to 100%. In contrast, data accuracy was consistently low (range = 26-61%), and data use for performance review remained limited, particularly at facility level (21-69%) compared to DHOs (33-81%). Among underlying factors, key strengths included that most sites had staff to compile and analyse data (93-100%), used data visualisations (93-95%), and showed strong technical and behavioural performance at the DHO level. Conversely, promotion of evidence-based decision-making was low (58-64%), and critical resource and capacity gaps persisted, including limited availability of minimum item bundles (22-24%), functional internet (60-83%), staff development plans (55%), user skills at facility level (20-61%), and data analysis and feedback mechanisms (50-74%). Overall, 350 (74%) end users reported a need for improvement, with no significant differences across site levels. Conclusions: These findings provide actionable guidance for policymakers to improve the quality and use of newborn and stillbirth data. Emerging priority actions include strengthening the data verification processes, building analytical capacity at facility level, and institutionalising regular data review with focus on decision-making.
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.