Mixed-methods, descriptive and observational cohort study examining feeding and growth patterns among low birthweight infants in India, Malawi and Tanzania: the LIFE study protocol.

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Ending preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 will not be possible without evidence-based strategies addressing the health and care of low birthweight (LBW, <2.5 kg) infants. The majority of LBW infants are born in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and account for more than 60%-80% of newborn deaths. Feeding promotion tailored to meet the nutritional needs of LBW infants in LMICs may serve a crucial role in curbing newborn mortality rates and promoting growth. The Low Birthweight Infant Feeding Exploration (LIFE) study aims to establish foundational knowledge regarding optimal feeding options for LBW infants in low-resource settings throughout infancy.

Related collections

Most cited references 53

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

A Tong, P SAINSBURY, J. Craig (2007)

Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.

0 comments Cited 8715 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research

Nicola K Gale, Gemma Heath, Elaine Cameron … (2013)

Background The Framework Method is becoming an increasingly popular approach to the management and analysis of qualitative data in health research. However, there is confusion about its potential application and limitations. Discussion The article discusses when it is appropriate to adopt the Framework Method and explains the procedure for using it in multi-disciplinary health research teams, or those that involve clinicians, patients and lay people. The stages of the method are illustrated using examples from a published study. Summary Used effectively, with the leadership of an experienced qualitative researcher, the Framework Method is a systematic and flexible approach to analysing qualitative data and is appropriate for use in research teams even where not all members have previous experience of conducting qualitative research.

0 comments Cited 2375 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener.

Kurt Kroenke, Robert L Spitzer, Janet B W Williams (2003)

A number of self-administered questionnaires are available for assessing depression severity, including the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9). Because even briefer measures might be desirable for use in busy clinical settings or as part of comprehensive health questionnaires, we evaluated a 2-item version of the PHQ depression module, the PHQ-2. The PHQ-2 inquires about the frequency of depressed mood and anhedonia over the past 2 weeks, scoring each as 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). The PHQ-2 was completed by 6000 patients in 8 primary care clinics and 7 obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Construct validity was assessed using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey, self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. Criterion validity was assessed against an independent structured mental health professional (MHP) interview in a sample of 580 patients. As PHQ-2 depression severity increased from 0 to 6, there was a substantial decrease in functional status on all 6 SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and healthcare utilization increased. Using the MHP reinterview as the criterion standard, a PHQ-2 score > or =3 had a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 92% for major depression. Likelihood ratio and receiver operator characteristic analysis identified a PHQ-2 score of 3 as the optimal cutpoint for screening purposes. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. The construct and criterion validity of the PHQ-2 make it an attractive measure for depression screening.

0 comments Cited 1214 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMJ Open

Title: BMJ open

Publisher: BMJ

ISSN (Electronic): 2044-6055

ISSN (Print): 2044-6055

Publication date (Electronic): Dec 02 2021

Volume: 11

Issue: 12

Affiliations

[1 ] Ariadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health / Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA lvesel@ariadnelabs.org.

[2 ] Ariadne Labs, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health / Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

[3 ] Department of Paediatrics, SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack, Orissa, India.

[4 ] Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Belgaum, Karnataka, India.

[5 ] Department of Neonatology, JJM Medical College, Davangere, Karnataka, India.

[6 ] Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, City Hospital, Cuttack, Orissa, India.

[7 ] Department of Paediatrics, SS Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Center, Davangere, Karnataka, India.

[8 ] Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

[9 ] Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina Project Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.

[10 ] Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

[11 ] Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

[12 ] Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

[13 ] Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

[14 ] Hubert Department of Global Health, Emory University School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

[15 ] Center for Nutrition, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

[16 ] Maternal, Newborn, Child Health and Nutrition Program, PATH, Seattle, Washington, USA.

[17 ] Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

[18 ] Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Article

Publisher Item ID: bmjopen-2020-048216

DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048216

PMC ID: 8640640

PubMed ID: 34857554

SO-VID: 77af8237-0b1b-42b0-91f8-4488cbbfd503

History

Keywords: neonatology,qualitative research,public health,nutrition & dietetics,epidemiology

Data availability:

Keywords: neonatology, qualitative research, public health, nutrition & dietetics, epidemiology

Mixed-methods, descriptive and observational cohort study examining feeding and growth patterns among low birthweight infants in India, Malawi and Tanzania: the LIFE study protocol.

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

AIP Publishing: Coronavirus

Most cited references 53

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research

The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 603

Cited by 5

Most referenced authors 1,132