Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19057607›Full record

ReviewJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2008

Meconium aspiration syndrome: historical aspects.

A A Fanaroff

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 174 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Meconium aspiration syndrome: from pathophysiology to treatment.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Meconium Aspiration Syndrome: A Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Meconium exposure and autism risk.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

A A FanaroffDepartment of Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University, Rainbow Babies & Children's Hospital/University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA. aaf2@case.edu
University Hospitals Case Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) is a common problem that continues to concern perinatologists and neonatologists. MAS is defined as respiratory distress in an infant born through meconium-stained amniotic fluid (MSAF) whose symptoms cannot be otherwise explained. This disorder may be life threatening, complicated by respiratory failure, pulmonary air leaks and persistent pulmonary hypertension. Approaches to the prevention of MAS have changed over time with collaboration between obstetricians and pediatricians forming the foundations for care. This report details the management of babies delivered with associated MSAF before the accumulation of evidence for best practice through appropriately powered, prospective randomized controlled trials.

Indexed as

Amniotic FluidEvidence-Based MedicineExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationGlucocorticoidsHumansHypertension, PulmonaryInfant, NewbornMeconiumMeconium Aspiration SyndromeGlucocorticoids

Identifiers

PMID19057607
OpenAlexW2025029680

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.