Cluster Randomized Trial of an Active, Multifaceted Educational Intervention Based on the WHO Reproductive Health Library to Improve Obstetric Practices
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The hypothesis underlying this study was that hospital obstetrical practices can be improved by interactive workshops that promote the use of evidence-based measures based on the World Health Organization’s Reproductive Health Library (RHL). The RHL is an annually updated electronic publication featuring Cochrane reviews in the area of reproductive health along with expert commentary, practical guidance documents, and various aids such as educational videos. Participating in the trial were 22 hospitals in Mexico City and 18 in northeast Thailand, whose maternity units conducted more than a thousand deliveries each year, and which had no direct affiliation with a university or other academic or research facility. Three workshops were held during a 6-month period: the first provided information about the project and principles of evidence-based decision-making; the second focused on RHL content; and the third concerned how best to implement desired changes. A stratified cluster randomized design took country, type of hospital, and number of births per year into account. The chief outcome measures were changes in 10 clinical practices as recommended in the RHL, implemented within 4 to 6 months after the third workshop. The intervention failed to influence targeted practices in any consistent or substantive way. Three of the 10 practices (iron/folate supplementation, postnatal uterotonic use, breast feeding on demand) already were part of the practice regimen, and it proved impractical to measure external cephalic version. Selective rather than routine episiotomy was performed more often in the intervention hospitals than in control hospitals. In Mexico, antibiotics tended to be used more at the time of cesarean delivery. No significant differences were documented in companionship during labor, the use of magnesium sulfate to treat eclampsia, corticosteroid treatment of women delivering before 34 weeks’ gestation, or the use of vacuum extraction. Awareness of the RHL increased substantially following the intervention at both study sites, as did its use. Despite the efficacy of active educational measures in expanding access to the RHL and promoting its use, this study failed to demonstrate lasting or substantial changes in reproductive medical practices. Within a 10- to 12-month time frame, at least, access to current knowledge of such practices apparently does not assure that they will become part of standard obstetrical care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,013 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».