Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42661065›Full record

ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2026

Analysis of neonatal resuscitation debriefings: mixed-methods results from a multicenter pilot study.

Rita Dadiz, Louis P Halamek, Julie E Riccio, Daniel Chiou, Michelle Olech Smith, Len Y Tanaka, Debra L Weiner, American Academy of Pediatrics WHiCED Task Force, Theodora A Stavroudis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 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

9 authors.

Rita DadizUniversity of Rochester Medicine, Rochester, NY, USA. rita_dadiz@urmc.rochester.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4530-6703
Louis P HalamekStanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3601-8168
Julie E RiccioUniversity of Rochester Medicine, Rochester, NY, USA.
Daniel ChiouCedars-Sinai Guerin Children's, Cedars-Sinai Health Sciences University, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Michelle Olech SmithAmerican Academy of Pediatrics, Itasca, IL, USA.
Len Y TanakaUniversity of Hawaii John A. Burns School of Medicine, Honolulu, HI, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8795-9916
Debra L WeinerHarvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
American Academy of Pediatrics WHiCED Task Force
Theodora A StavroudisCedars-Sinai Guerin Children's, Cedars-Sinai Health Sciences University, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyze the strengths, weaknesses, and action plans discussed during clinical event debriefing (CED) following neonatal resuscitation and the feasibility of conducting CED with a standardized framework. STUDY

designIn a multicenter mixed-methods pilot study, teams conducted CED from December 2022 to February 2023. We used descriptive statistics to analyze CED characteristics and qualitative content analysis to code debriefing points and identify themes.

resultsTeams conducted 24 CEDs, of which >70% occurred within 1 h of resuscitation and lasted ≤10 min. Teams identified 40 strengths, 44 weaknesses, and 28 action plans in clinical care, communication and teamwork, and equipment and supplies. Most debriefing points focused on behavioral skills rather than technical performance.

conclusionBehavioral skills were prominent in post-resuscitation CEDs. Standardized implementation of the CED framework and shared data collection across institutions may facilitate targeted training and inform quality improvement strategies in neonatal resuscitation in a national CED program.

Identifiers

PMID42661065

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.