Perceptions of families and healthcare providers about feeding preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit: Protocol for a qualitative systematic review
BMJ Open, ISSN: 2044-6055, Vol: 14, Issue: 6, Page: e084884
2024
- 14Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures14
- Readers14
- 14
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
University of Iowa College of Public Health Researchers Discuss Research in Critical Care Medicine (Perceptions of families and healthcare providers about feeding preterm infants in the neonatal intensive care unit: protocol for a qualitative ...)
2024 JUL 09 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Clinical Trials Daily -- Data detailed on critical care medicine have been presented.
Article Description
Introduction The underdevelopment of preterm infants can lead to delayed progression through key early milestones. Demonstration of safe oral feeding skills, constituting proper suck-swallow reflex are requirements for discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to ensure adequate nutrition acquisition. Helping an infant develop these skills can be draining and emotional for both families and healthcare staff involved in the care of preterm infants with feeding difficulties. Currently, there are no systematic reviews evaluating both family and healthcare team perspectives on aspects of oral feeding. Thus, we first aim to evaluate the current knowledge surrounding the perceptions, experiences and needs of families with preterm babies in the context of oral feeding in the NICU. Second, we aim to evaluate the current knowledge surrounding the perceptions, experiences and needs of healthcare providers (physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, dietitians, speech-language pathologists and occupational therapists) in the context of oral feeding in the NICU. Methods and analysis A literature search will be conducted in multiple electronic databases from their inception, including PubMed, CINHAL, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials and PsycINFO. No restrictions will be applied based on language or data of publication. Two authors will screen the titles and abstracts and then review the full text for the studies' inclusion in the review. The data will be extracted into a pilot-tested data collection sheet by three independent authors. To evaluate the quality, reliability and relevance of the included studies, the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist will be used. The overall evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. We will report the results of the systematic review by following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the synthesis of Qualitative research checklist. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval of this project is not required as this is a systematic review using published and publicly available data and will not involve contact with human subjects. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO registration number CRD42023479288.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85196899287&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084884; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38908851; https://bmjopen.bmj.com/lookup/doi/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084884; https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084884; https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/14/6/e084884
BMJ
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know