ArticleBMJ open2017
Simplification of the Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring System: retrospective study of two institutions in the USA.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eat, Sleep, Console model for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Non-pharmacological care for opioid withdrawal in newborns.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Eat, Sleep, Console Approach or Usual Care for Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal.The New England journal of medicine · 2023Trial
- Analgosedation in Neonatal Intensive Care: Current Strategies, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Modeling heart rate patterns to quantify neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Abstinence scoring algorithms for treatment of neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS).Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Article
- Neonatal Abstinence Signs during Treatment: Trajectory, Resurgence and Heterogeneity.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
- A review of the genomics of neonatal abstinence syndrome.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Review
- Article
- Informing the Development of a Standardized Clinical Definition of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome: Protocol for a Modified-Delphi Expert Panel.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
- Integrated Review of the Assessment of Newborns With Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2021Review
- Improving the Assessment of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS).Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Transcutaneous Auricular Neurostimulation (tAN): A Novel Adjuvant Treatment in Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Association of a Simplified Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring Tool With the Need for Pharmacologic Treatment for Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- The Epidemic of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome, Historical References of Its' Origins, Assessment, and Management.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a simplified Finnegan Neonatal Abstinence Scoring System (sFNAS) that will highly correlate with scores ≥8 and ≥12 in infants being assessed with the FNAS. DESIGN, SETTING AND
participantsThis is a retrospective analysis involving 367 patients admitted to two level IV neonatal intensive care units with a total of 40 294 observations. Inclusion criteria included neonates with gestational age ≥37 0/7 weeks, who are being assessed for neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) using the FNAS. Infants with a gestational age <37 weeks were excluded.
methodsA linear regression model based on the original FNAS data from one institution was developed to determine optimal values for each item in the sFNAS. A backward elimination approach was used, removing the items that contributed least to the Pearson's correlation. The sFNAS was then cross-validated with data from a second institution.
resultsPearson's correlation between the proposed sFNAS and the FNAS was 0.914. The optimal treatment cut-off values for the sFNAS were 6 and 10 to predict FNAS scores ≥8 and ≥12, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of these cut-off values to detect FNAS scores ≥8 and ≥12 were 0.888 and 0.883 for a cut-off of 6, and 0.637 and 0.992 for a cut-off of 10, respectively. The sFNAS cross-validation resulted in a Pearson's correlation of 0.908, sensitivity and specificity of 0.860 and 0.873 for a cut-off of 6, and 0.525 and 0.986 for a cut-off of 10, respectively.
conclusionThe sFNAS has a high statistical correlation with the FNAS, and it is cross-validated for the assessment of infants with NAS. It has excellent specificity and negative predictive value for identifying infants with FNAS scores ≥8 and ≥12.
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.