| Title |
Effectiveness of early intervention programs for parents of preterm infants: a meta-review of systematic reviews
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pediatrics, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12887-018-1205-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shuby Puthussery, Muhammad Chutiyami, Pei-Ching Tseng, Lesley Kilby, Jogesh Kapadia |
| Abstract |
Various intervention programs exist for parents of preterm babies and some systematic reviews (SRs) have synthesised the evidence of their effectiveness. These reviews are, however, limited to specific interventions, components, or outcomes, and a comprehensive evidence base is lacking. The aim of this meta-review was to appraise and meta-synthesise the evidence from existing SRs to provide a comprehensive evidence base on the effectiveness of interventions for parents of preterm infants on parental and infant outcomes. We conducted a comprehensive search of the following databases to identify relevant SRs: Cochrane library, Web of science, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, Medline, ScienceDirect, Scopus, IBSS, DOAJ, ERIC, EPPI-Centre, PROSPERO, WHO Library. Additional searches were conducted using authors' institutional libraries, Google Scholar, and the reference lists of identified reviews. Identified articles were screened in two stages against an inclusion criteria with titles and abstracts screened first followed by full-text screening. Selected SRs were appraised using the AMSTAR tool. Extracted data using a predesigned tool were synthesised narratively examining the direction of impact on outcomes. We found 11 SRs eligible for inclusion that synthesised a total of 343 quantitative primary studies. The average quality of the SRs was 'medium'. Thirty four interventions were reported across the SRs with considerable heterogeneity in the structural framework and the targeted outcomes that included maternal-infant dyadic, maternal/parental, and infant outcomes. Among all interventions, Kangaroo Care (KC) showed the most frequent positive impact across outcomes (n = 19) followed by Mother Infant Transaction Program (MITP) (n = 14). Other interventions with most consistent positive impact on infant outcomes were Modified-Mother Infant Transaction Program (M-MITP) (n = 6), Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) (n = 5) and Creating Opportunities for Parent Empowerment (COPE) (n = 5). Overall, interventions with both home and facility based components showed the most frequent positive impact across outcomes. Neonatal care policy and planning for preterm babies should consider the implementation of interventions with most positive impact on outcomes. The heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes calls for the development and implementation of an integrated program for parents of preterm infants with a clearly defined global set of parental and infant outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 20% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 274 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 45 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 8% |
| Researcher | 22 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 60 | 22% |
| Unknown | 84 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 66 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 16% |
| Psychology | 31 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 23 | 8% |
| Unknown | 99 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#6,955,569
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#1,297
of 3,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,495
of 326,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#60
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.