ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2026
Impact of interprofessional blended learning with low-fidelity simulation on neonatal resuscitation skills among interns: a quasi-experimental study in Tanzania.
Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the national rollout of the Helping Babies Breathe (HBB) program, neonatal mortality due to birth asphyxia remains a major challenge in Tanzania. Evidence shows that there is inadequate competence (including knowledge, skills, and attitudes) in newborn resuscitation among medical and nursing interns as they transition into practice. The traditional method of a one-day instructor-led HBB model provides little hands-on practice. Integrating low-fidelity simulation with blended learning may contribute to better transfer of learning and offer a more sustainable model for skills retention.
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of interprofessional low-fidelity simulation with a blended-learning approach among medical and nursing interns' HBB knowledge and skills in Dar es Salaam.
methodsA controlled quasi-experimental design was used with 128 participants. Stratified random sampling by profession was used to select participants for the two groups (64 in the intervention group, 64 in the control group). The intervention group received a 2-h instructor-led online session and two days (16 h total) of hands-on low-fidelity simulation, guided by the HBB 2nd Edition curriculum (which emphasises the Golden Minute, preparation for birth, initial steps including stimulation and warming, bag-mask ventilation, and post-resuscitation care through interactive case-based scenarios and paired practice). The control group received reading materials and continued with their business-as-usual practice. Knowledge (17-item MCQ) and skills (18-item checklist) were assessed at baseline, immediately after intervention, and six weeks post-intervention for both groups. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS version 27, with an independent t-test and a linear mixed model (LMM). β coefficients represent adjusted mean differences from linear mixed models.
resultsThe groups were similar at baseline. The intervention group showed significant improvements compared with the control group. Knowledge score increased by β = 5.39 immediately post-intervention post-training, and by β = 3.90 in six weeks (both p < 0.001). Skills improved by β = 5.36 immediately and β = 3.47 at six weeks (both p < 0.001).
conclusionLow-fidelity simulation with blended learning significantly improved HBB knowledge and skills among interns, with effects sustained at six weeks. This approach is practical and scalable for strengthening newborn resuscitation capacity in resource-limited settings.
trial registrationTrial registered to Pan African Trial Registry with Reg no PACTR202512785351089.
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.