ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2012
Reclassification of SIDS cases--a need for adjustment of the San Diego classification?
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS): State of the Art and Future Directions.International journal of medical sciences · 2024Review
- Risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Among Siblings of Children Who Died of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in Denmark.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- An evaluation of pathologists' application of the diagnostic criteria from the San Diego definition of SIDS and unclassified sudden infant death.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Rate of deaths due to child abuse and neglect in children 0-3 years of age in Germany.International journal of legal medicine · 2015Article
- Toward a standardized investigation protocol in sudden unexpected deaths in infancy in South Africa: a multicenter study of medico-legal investigation procedures and outcomes.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A study was undertaken reclassifying cases of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) taken from two geographically separate locations utilizing the San Diego definition with subclassifications. One hundred twenty-eight infant cases were examined from files at Forensic Science South Australia in Adelaide, SA, Australia over a 7.5-year period from July 1999 to January 2007. Thirty-one cases (24%) had initially been diagnosed as SIDS and 30 (23%) as undetermined while 67 (52%) had an explainable cause of death. After reclassification, the number of SIDS cases had increased to 49 of the 128 cases, now representing 38% of the cases; category IB SIDS constituted 10 (20%) and II SIDS 39 (80%) of the SIDS cases. No cases were classified as IA SIDS. Two hundred eighteen infant cases were identified from the files of the Department of Forensic Medicine, Aarhus University, Denmark over a 16-year period from 1992 to 2007. Eighty-two (38%) were originally diagnosed as SIDS, 128 (59%) with identifiable causes of death, and 8 (4%) as unexplained. After review, 77 (35%) cases were reclassified as SIDS, a decrease of 6%. Twenty (26%) infants were classified as category IB SIDS and 57 (74%) as II SIDS. None of the cases met the criteria for IA SIDS. Problems arose in assessing cases with failure to thrive, fever, and possible asphyxia. Modifications to the San Diego subclassifications might improve the consistency of categorizing these cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22037935What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.