ArticleBMJ case reports2011
Is heel prick as safe as we think?
Article in BMJ case reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neonatal Kidney Function, Injury and Drug Dosing: A Contemporary Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Application of machine learning algorithms for accurate determination of bilirubin level on in vitro engineered tissue phantom images.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Indications, Measurements, and Complications of Ten Essential Neonatal Procedures.International journal of pediatrics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purulent lymphadenitis is rare in newborn and is associated with prematurity and invasive procedure. Neonatal staphylococcal infections due to skin interruption during intramuscular vitamin K administration and national metabolic screening programme (heel prick or Guthrie card test) have been already previously described. This is a report of a premature infant who developed an inguinal adenitis as a result of late complications from heel pricks. The diagnosis was made on clinical grounds and confirmed by ultrasound scans. Staphylococcus aureus was isolated. Bacteremia did not occur and the lymphadenitis had a complete resolution with antimicrobial therapy. The heel prick is a well-established procedure in neonatal practice, nevertheless it is not risk-free. The attention to signs of infections is important to avoid complications such as purulent lymphadenitis, abscess formation and septicemia. Best practice prevention and control in minimising the risk of infections are the most important intervention to prevent this complication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.