Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17694355›Full record

ArticleJournal of inherited metabolic disease2007

Structures for clinical follow-up: newborn screening.

R Rodney Howell, Gilian Engelson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of inherited metabolic disease, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Newborn blood spot screening: new opportunities, old problems.Journal of inherited metabolic disease · 2009
    Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

R Rodney HowellDepartment of Pediatrics, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, P.O. Box o16820, Miami, FL 33101, USA. rhowell@miami.edu
Gilian Engelson
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development · USUniversity of Miami · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical follow-up of children identified by newborn screening is critical in ensuring that the short-term and long-term needs of the newborn infant are managed. Within the United States, one of the biggest challenges in the newborn screening programme is clinical follow-up, and there still remains wide variation in practice patterns among states on how infants are followed up. In addition, there is lack of consistency in the treatment and diagnostic protocols used by health care providers. There is growing interest in the establishment of a systematic process for follow-up and for the development of a nationwide infrastructure that will ensure that all children will be provided consistent and effective treatment in a timely manner. Within this framework of optimal diagnosis and therapy, there must also be opportunities to study the natural history of these conditions, to monitor short- and long-term health outcomes, to assist with policy decision-making, to validate the effectiveness of screening, to define the clinical spectrum of the diseases, and to provide opportunities for the advancement of novel therapeutic interventions and screening/diagnostic technologies. It will only be through the development of a structured clinical follow-up system that we will be able to make certain these newborn infants are provided the most appropriate treatment for their disease variants and allow researchers to make more rapid advances in improving the clinical management of these conditions.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfant, NewbornInfant WelfareNeonatal ScreeningProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationPublic HealthWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID17694355
OpenAlexW2081844690

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.