Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29233168›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

A protocol for a systematic review of economic evaluation studies conducted on neonatal systemic infections in South Asia.

Shruti Murthy, Denny John, Isadora Perpetual Godinho, Myron Anthony Godinho, Vasudeva Guddattu, N Sreekumaran Nair

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Shruti MurthyDepartment of Statistics, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Level 6, Health Science Library Building, Madhav Nagar, Manipal, Karnataka, 576104, India. shruti.murthy@learner.manipal.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1523-8244
Denny JohnThe Campbell Collaboration, New Delhi, India.
Isadora Perpetual GodinhoSchool of Economics, University of Nottingham (Malaysia campus), Semenyih, Malaysia.
Myron Anthony GodinhoPublic Health Evidence South Asia (PHESA), Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Vasudeva GuddattuDepartment of Statistics, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Level 6, Health Science Library Building, Madhav Nagar, Manipal, Karnataka, 576104, India.
N Sreekumaran NairDepartment of Biostatistics (Biometrics), Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India.
Manipal Academy of Higher Education · INJawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research · INMaastricht University · NLUniversity of Nottingham Malaysia Campus · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeonatal systemic infections and their consequent impairments give rise to long-lasting health, economic and social effects on the neonate, the family and the nation. Considering the dearth of consolidated economic evidence in this important area, this systematic review aims to critically appraise and consolidate the evidence on economic evaluations of management of neonatal systemic infections in South Asia.

methodsFull and partial economic evaluations, published in English, associated with the management of neonatal systemic infections in South Asia will be included. Any intervention related to management of neonatal systemic infections will be eligible for inclusion. Comparison can include a placebo or alternative standard of care. Interventions without any comparators will also be eligible for inclusion. Outcomes of this review will include measures related to resource use, costs and cost-effectiveness. Electronic searches will be conducted on PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, Web of Science, EconLit, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Library (CRD) Database, Popline, IndMed, MedKnow, IMSEAR, the Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry and Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation (PEDE). Conference proceedings and grey literature will be searched in addition to performing back referencing of bibliographies of included studies. Two authors will independently screen studies (in title, abstract and full-text stages), extract data and assess risk of bias. A narrative summary and tables will be used to summarize the characteristics and results of included studies. DISCUSSION: Neonatal systemic infections can have significant economic repercussions on the families, health care providers and, cumulatively, the nation. Pediatric economic evaluations have focused on the under-five age group, and published consolidated economic evidence for neonates is missing in the developing world context. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review of economic evidence on neonatal systemic infections in the South Asian context. Further, this protocol provides an underst anding of the methods used to design and evaluate economic evidence for methodological quality, transparency and focus on health equity. This review will also highlight existing gaps in research and identify scope for further research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017047275.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAsiaDeveloping CountriesHealth ResourcesHumansInfant HealthNeonatal SepsisSystematic Reviews as TopicEconomic evaluationNeonateProtocolSepsisSouth AsiaSystematic reviewSystemic infections

Identifiers

PMID29233168
PMCPMC5727883
OpenAlexW2773468547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.