MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3182040870 · doi:10.2196/28644

Combined Clinical Audits and Low-Dose, High-frequency, In-service Training of Health Care Providers and Community Health Workers to Improve Maternal and Newborn Health in Mali: Protocol for a Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trial

2021· article· en· W3182040870 on OpenAlexaffvenue
David Zombré, Jean‐Luc Kortenaar, Farhana Zareef, Moussa Doumbia, Sekou Doumbia, Fadima Cheick Haidara, Katie McLaughlin, Samba O. Sow, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Diego G. Bassani

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCluster randomised controlled trialAuditRandomized controlled trialHealth careHealth facilityIntervention (counseling)PopulationNursingFamily medicineEnvironmental healthHealth servicesSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although most births in Mali occur in health facilities, a substantial number of newborns still die during delivery and within the first 7 days of life, mainly because of existing training deficiencies and the challenges of maintaining intrapartum and postpartum care skills. OBJECTIVE: This trial aims to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an intervention combining clinical audits and low-dose, high-frequency (LDHF) in-service training of health care providers and community health workers to reduce perinatal mortality. METHODS: The study is a three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial in the Koulikoro region in Mali. The units of randomization are each of 84 primary care facilities. Each trial arm will include 28 facilities. The facilities in the first intervention arm will receive support in implementing mortality and morbidity audits, followed by one-day LDHF training biweekly, for 6 months. The health workers in the second intervention arm (28 facilities) will receive a refresher course in maternal neonatal and child health (MNCH) for 10 days in a classroom setting, in addition to mortality and morbidity audits and LDHF hands-on training for 6 months. The control arm, also with 28 facilities, will consist solely of the standard MNCH refresher training delivered in a classroom setting. The main outcomes are perinatal deaths in the intervention arms compared with those in the control arm. A final sample of approximately 600 deliveries per cluster was expected for a total of 30,000 newborns over 14 months. Data sources included both routine health records and follow-up household surveys of all women who recently gave birth in the study facility 7 days postdelivery. Data collection tools will capture perinatal deaths, complications, and adverse events, as well as the status of the newborn during the perinatal period. A full economic evaluation will be conducted to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of each of the case-based focused LDHF hands-on training strategies in comparison to MNCH refresher training in a classroom setting. RESULTS: The trial is complete. The recruitment began on July 15, 2019, and data collection began on July 23, 2019, and was completed in November 2020. Data cleaning or analyses began at the time of submission of the protocol. CONCLUSIONS: The results will provide policy makers and practitioners with crucial information on the impact of different health care provider training modalities on maternal and newborn health outcomes and how to successfully implement these strategies in resource-limited settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03656237; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03656237. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/28644.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.010

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.164
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→