Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28431191›Full record

Trial reportResearch in nursing & health2017

Timing for the Introduction of Cycled Light for Extremely Preterm Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Debra H Brandon, Susan G Silva, Jinhee Park, William Malcolm, Heba Kamhawy, Diane Holditch-Davis

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Research in nursing & health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. NICU sensory experiences associated with positive outcomes: an integrative review of evidence from 2015-2020.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Debra H BrandonAssociate Professor and Director of PhD and Post-Doctoral Programs, School of Nursing, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Duke University, DUMC 3322, 307 Trent Dr., Durham, NC, 27710.ORCID 0000-0001-6375-6719
Susan G SilvaAssociate Professor, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC.
Jinhee ParkAssistant Professor, Boston College William F. Connell School of Nursing, Chestnut Hill, MA.
William MalcolmAssociate Professor, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Heba KamhawyResearch Assistant, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC.
Diane Holditch-DavisMarcus Hobbs Distinguished Professor Emerita of Nursing, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC.
Duke University · USBoston College · US

Funding

Preterm Infants: Light Effects on Health and DevelopmentR01NR008044 · NINR · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI BRANDON, DEBRA H · 2003 to 2007
$1.6M
NINR NIH HHS R01 NR008044
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Day-night cycled light improves health outcomes in preterm infants, yet the best time to institute cycled light is unclear. The hypothesis of this study was that extremely preterm infants receiving early cycled light would have better health and developmental outcomes than infants receiving late cycled light. Infants born at ≤28 weeks gestation were randomly assigned to early cycled light (ECL) starting at 28 weeks postmenstrual age [PMA] or late cycled light (LCL), starting at 36 weeks PMA. Daylight was 200-600 lux and night was 5-30 lux. Primary outcomes were weight over time and length of hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were hospital costs, sleep development, and neurodevelopment at 9, 18, and 24 months corrected age. Of 121 infants randomized, 118 were included in analysis. Weight gain in the two groups did not differ significantly but increased across time in both groups. In PMA weeks 36-44, the mean weight gain was 193.8 grams in the ECL group compared to 176.3 grams in the LCL group. Effect sizes for weight were Cohen d = 0.26 and 0.36 for 36 and 44 weeks PMA. Infants in the ECL group went home an average of 5.5 days earlier than the LCL group, but this difference was not statistically significant. There were no group differences on neurodevelopmental outcomes. Although statistically non-significant, clinically important differences of improved weight gain and decreased hospital stay were observed with ECL. The small observed effect sizes on weight during hospitalization should be considered in future cycled light research with extremely preterm infants. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Circadian RhythmFemaleHumansInfantInfant, Extremely PrematureInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalMalePhototherapyTime FactorsWeight Gainchild developmentcircadian rhythmscycled lightextremely preterminfant weight gainprematuritysleep

Identifiers

PMID28431191
PMCPMC5522348
OpenAlexW2610687601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.