Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15871980›Full record

ArticleArchives of disease in childhood2005

Towards safer neonatal transfer: the importance of critical incident review.

S J Moss, N D Embleton, A C Fenton

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of disease in childhood, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Data variables reported during neonatal transport: a systematic literature review.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Neonatal Transport in the Practice of the Crews of the Polish Medical Air Rescue: A Retrospective Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

S J MossRoyal Victoria Infirmary, Queen Victoria Road, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4LP, UK. samanthajmoss@doctors.org.uk
N D Embleton
A C Fenton

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCritical incidents are common during the inter-hospital transfer of sick patients, and infants are an especially vulnerable group.

aimsTo examine the effect of critical incident review on the number of adverse events during inter-hospital transfer of sick infants.

methodsCritical incidents over an eight year period are reported from a single neonatal transfer service before and after major service changes were made. The changes were instigated as part of ongoing critical incident reviews.

resultsChanges made as a result of critical incident review significantly reduced the number of incidents contributed to by poor preparation, transport equipment or clinical problems, ambulance delays, and ambulance equipment failure.

conclusionsThe continuous process of critical incident reporting and review can reduce the number of adverse events during the transfer of critically ill infants.

Indexed as

Risk ManagementAmbulancesEnglandHumansInfant CareInfant, NewbornRetrospective StudiesTask Performance and AnalysisTransportation of Patients

Identifiers

PMID15871980
PMCPMC1720466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.