The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Essential newborn care in rural settings: The case of Warrap State in South Sudan
Open accessAbstract
Essential newborn care is taking a predominant role in addressing under-five healthcare delivery interventions. There are no current well-established guidelines or common methodologies on how to assess the situation of newborn care in countries with weak health information systems, especially when addressing situational needs in rural settings. The main objective of this study was to test the feasibility of collecting information using a community based approach to assess the level of coverage of essential newborn care, especially for rural settings. Six indicators related to promotion and provision of thermal care, early initiation of exclusive breastfeeding, and hygienic cord care, were measured. A two-stage stratified and weighted random sampling was carried out. Standard sample calculations were used to determine a sample of 511 respondents. Descriptive results from the population survey showed that the prevalence of newborns receiving all recommended elements of essential new born care in the surveyed area was 1%. The most common element completed, with nine out of ten respondents, was wrapping the newborn immediately after birth, but only 1% were not bathed within the first six hours after birth. Survey results confirmed low coverage of systematic application of essential newborn care measures in rural areas of Warrap State in South Sudan.This observational study indicates that the collection of information on health care behaviours around essential newborn care indicators (thermal, cord and eye care, and breastfeeding) can be reliably achieved, especially in hard-to-reach areas, at the community level.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“while in South Sudan, one study reports that 6% of newborns received this care60”
From A systematic review of newborn health interventions in humanitarian settings (2022) · cites this paper as [60]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 10 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosales, A. C., Hedrick, J. A., Cherian, D. T., Moore, E. C., Brown, K. M., & Walumbe, E.
- Affiliations
- World Vision (US)
- Venue
- African Evaluation Journal
- Publisher
- AOSIS
- Published
- 2014-12-18
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2306-5133 (ISSN-L)
- 2310-4988
- OpenAlex
- W1975112147
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- African Evaluation Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- United States Agency for International Development
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
- Keywords
- essential newborn care, rural health care, South Sudan, exclusive breastfeeding, health care coverage, community-based data collection, health information systems, hard-to-reach populations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Essential newborn care in rural settings: The case of Warrap State in South Sudan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4102/aej.v2i1.80
- The paper
- Rosales, A. C., Hedrick, J. A., Cherian, D. T., Moore, E. C., Brown, K. M., & Walumbe, E. (2014). Essential newborn care in rural settings: The case of Warrap State in South Sudan. African Evaluation Journal. https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v2i1.80