MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406254758 · doi:10.1007/s00431-024-05968-8

The impact of leadership interventions on neonatal care: a systematic review of current literature

2025· review· en· W4406254758 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Flavia Beccia, Maria Rosaria Gualano, Gianluca Fevola, Emanuele Capogna, Chiara Scarfagna, Michele Bonacquisti, Walter Ricciardi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pediatrics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineTeamworkContext (archaeology)NursingQuality managementImplementation researchMedical educationSystematic reviewBest practiceMEDLINEOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective leadership is essential in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), where complex, high-stakes environments require coordinated multidisciplinary teamwork. Strong leadership improves clinical outcomes, team performance, and staff well-being. This systematic review assesses various leadership models and interventions in NICUs to identify best practices and areas for future research. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, covering studies published from 2010 to October 2024. Articles were screened using the PRISMA guidelines, and inclusion criteria focused on primary studies in NICU settings evaluating leadership interventions. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Nine studies from diverse countries and research designs were included. Leadership interventions varied from simulation-based training programs to co-leadership models. High-fidelity simulation boot camps significantly improved self-perceived skills, teamwork, and leadership confidence among trainees. While most studies reported positive impacts on team performance and patient safety, one large-scale quality improvement program showed no significant improvement in clinical outcomes for very-low-birth-weight infants. CONCLUSION: The findings emphasize that leadership interventions, including structured training and co-leadership, enhance team dynamics and clinical outcomes in NICUs. However, variability in study designs and reliance on self-reported data highlight the need for standardized evaluation methods. Future research should focus on long-term impacts, cross-context comparisons, and refining leadership frameworks to address the unique challenges of NICU settings. Promoting effective leadership not only improves patient care but also fosters a resilient and collaborative work environment. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Leadership is crucial in NICUs, where complex, high-stakes environments demand coordinated, multidisciplinary teamwork. Strong leadership enhances clinical outcomes, team performance, and staff well-being. • No systematic review of leadership interventions in neonatal care has been conducted to date. WHAT IS NEW: • Recent studies highlight a range of tools, including simulation-based training programs and co-leadership models. • High-fidelity simulations have been shown to significantly improve participants' self-perceived skills, teamwork, and leadership confidence.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PediatricsSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207