ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2018
Evaluation of SEPs in asphyxiated newborns using a 4-electrode aEEG brain monitoring set-up.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuromonitoring in neonatal critical care part II: extremely premature infants and critically ill neonates.Pediatric research · 2023Review
- Developing Disposable EEG Cap for Infant Recordings at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Prognostic value of somatosensory-evoked potentials in the newborn with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy after the introduction of therapeutic hypothermia.European journal of pediatrics · 2022Article
- A dataset of neonatal EEG recordings with seizure annotations.Scientific data · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the reliability of recording cortical somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) in asphyxiated newborns using the 4-electrode setup applied in routine long-term amplitude-integrated EEG (aEEG) brain monitoring and to assess the number of averages needed for reliably detecting the cortical responses.
methodsWe evaluated median nerve SEPs in 50 asphyxiated full-term newborns. The SEP interpretation (present or absent) from the original recordings with 21-electrodes and approximately 600 trials served as the reference. This was compared to SEP classification (absent, present, or unreliable) based on a reduced (300 or 150) number of averages, and to classification based on only four electrodes (F3, P3, F4, P4).
resultsCompared to the original classification, cortical SEPs were uniformly interpreted as present or absent in all 50 newborns with the 4-electrode setup and 600 averages. Reducing number of averages to 300 still resulted in correct SEP interpretation in 49/50 newborns with 21-electrode setup, and 46/50 newborns with 4-electrode setup.
conclusionsEvaluation of early cortical neonatal SEPs is reliable from the 4-electrode setup commonly used in aEEG monitoring. SEP is discernible in most newborns with 300 averages. SIGNIFICANCE: Adding SEP into routine aEEG monitoring offers an additional tool for early neonatal neurophysiological evaluation.
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.