ArticleBMC pediatrics2026
Construction of a sensitive indicator system for the quality of neonatal jaundice care.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeonatal jaundice is a prevalent neonatal condition, with improper management potentially leading to severe neurological damage. Significant disparities in care quality exist globally, highlighting the urgent need for a standardized, disease-specific nursing quality evaluation system. AIMS AND
objectivesThis study aimed to construct a scientifically rigorous and reliable sensitive indicator system for evaluating the quality of neonatal jaundice care, based on Donabedian's structure-process-outcome model.
methodsA methodological study design was employed. An initial draft was developed through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews. Subsequently, 18 experts participated in two rounds of Delphi consultations to reach a consensus on the indicators.
resultsThe effective response rates for the two consultation rounds were 90.0% and 100.0%, respectively. The expert authority coefficients were 0.851 and 0.879. The final system comprises 3 first-level, 10 second-level, and 24 third-level indicators.
conclusionThe successfully constructed indicator system demonstrates strong scientific validity and reliability. It provides a consensus-based, standardized framework for assessing neonatal jaundice care quality, requiring further empirical testing before large-scale implementation.
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.