ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2014
Evaluation of preventive effects of colostrum against neonatal conjunctivitis: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Milk Therapy: Unexpected Uses for Human Breast Milk.Nutrients · 2019Pooled it
- The Use of Human Milk for Therapeutic Purposes Other Than Nutrition.Turkish archives of pediatrics · 2022Article
- The Anti-Inflammatory Properties of the Topical Application of Human Milk in Dermal and Optical Diseases.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Review
- Non-Nutritional Use of Human Milk Part 1: A Survey of the Use of Breast Milk as a Therapy for Mucosal Infections of Various Types in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeonatal conjunctivitis leads to several ocular consequences in the affected neonates such as blindness. Currently available therapeutic options include NaNO3, Gentamicin, Neomycin and so on, in which each of them has their own limitations. Regarding the immunologic content of colostrum and its safety and easy accessibility, we aimed to evaluate its preventive effects against neonatal conjunctivitis. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this clinical trial, conducted from November 2011 to July 2012, 300 preterm neonates, with culture negative eye swab, were enrolled and randomly assigned into three groups. The intervention group received two drops of colostrum. Control group received no treatment and other neonates were treated with topical Erythromycin ointment (0.5%). All neonates were followed for occurrence of clinical conjunctivitis for 28 days. Data analysis were performed by Chi-square test.
resultsOur data demonstrate the beneficial preventive effects of Colostrum against neonatal conjunctivitis (P = 0.036).
conclusionColostrum is suggested as an alternative prophylactic option for antibiotics against neonatal conjunctivitis. As colostrum is easily accessible without cost, potential hazards and side effects, public education about its topical favorable effects is worthwhile.
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.