Parental participation in the care of hospitalized neonates in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: To determine the effect of parental participation in hospital care on neonatal and parental outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to identify the range of parental duties in the care of hospitalized neonates in LMICs. Methods: We searched CINAHL, CENTRAL, LILACs, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to February 2022. Randomized and non-randomized studies from LMICs were eligible if parents performed one or more roles traditionally undertaken by healthcare staff. The primary outcome was hospital length-of-stay. Secondary outcomes included mortality, readmission, breastfeeding, growth, development and parental well-being. Data was extracted in duplicate by two independent reviewers using a piloted extraction form. Results: Eighteen studies (eight randomized and ten non-randomized) were included from seven middle-income countries. The types of parental participation included hygiene and infection prevention, feeding, monitoring and documentation, respiratory care, developmental care, medication administration and decision making. Meta-analyses showed that parental participation was not associated with hospital length-of-stay (MD -2.35, 95% CI -6.78-2.07). However, parental involvement was associated with decreased mortality (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.95), increased breastfeeding (OR 2.97 95% CI 1.65-5.35) and decreased hospital readmission (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.81). Narrative synthesis demonstrated additional benefits for growth, short-term neurodevelopment and parental well-being. Ten of the eighteen studies had a high risk of bias. Conclusion: Parental participation in neonatal hospital care is associated with improvement in several key neonatal outcomes in middle-income countries. The lack of data from low-income countries suggests that there remains barriers to parental participation in resource-poor settings. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=187562], identifier [CRD42020187562].
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.025 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".