Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31022223›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Risk factors of neonatal sepsis in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Shruti Murthy, Myron Anthony Godinho, Vasudeva Guddattu, Leslie Edward Simon Lewis, N Sreekumaran Nair

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
18.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 188 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. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Review

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Shruti MurthyDepartment of Statistics, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-1523-8244
Myron Anthony GodinhoWHO Collaborating Centre for eHealth, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Vasudeva GuddattuDepartment of Statistics, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-6648-2730
Leslie Edward Simon LewisDepartment of Paediatrics, Neonatology Unit, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
N Sreekumaran NairDepartment of Medical Biometrics & Informatics (Biostatistics), 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 · INUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of neonatal sepsis in India is the highest in the world. Evidence regarding its risk factors can guide clinical practice and prevention strategies.

objectiveTo review, assess and synthesize the available literature from India on the risk factors of sepsis among neonates. METHODOLOGY: A systematic review was conducted. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Popline, IndMed, Indian Science Abstracts and Google Scholar from inception up to March 23, 2018 to identify observational analytical studies reporting on risk factors of laboratory-confirmed neonatal sepsis in India. Two authors independently screened studies (title, abstract and full-text stages), extracted data, and assessed quality. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed as substantial heterogeneity was anticipated. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were additionally performed. Effect size in our review included odds ratio and standardized mean difference.

resultsFifteen studies were included from 11,009 records, of which nine were prospective in design. Birthweight and gestational age at delivery were the most frequently reported factors. On meta-analyses, it was found that male sex (OR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.68), out born neonates (OR: 5.5, 95% CI: 2.39, 12.49), need for artificial ventilation (OR: 5.61; 95% CI: 8.21, 41.18), gestational age <37 weeks (OR: 2.05; 95% CI:1.40, 2.99) and premature rupture of membranes (OR:11.14, 95% CI: 5.54, 22.38) emerged as risk factors for neonatal sepsis. Included studies scored lowest on exposure assessment and confounding adjustment, which limited comparability. Inadequacy and variation in definitions and methodology affected the quality of included studies and increased heterogeneity.

conclusionsMale neonates, outborn admissions, need for artificial ventilation, gestational age <37 weeks and premature rupture of membranes are risk factors for sepsis among neonates in India. Robustly designed and reported research is urgently needed to confirm the role of other risk factors of neonatal sepsis in India.

Indexed as

Age FactorsBirth WeightGestational AgeHumansIncidenceIndiaInfantInfant, NewbornNeonatal SepsisPremature BirthRespiration, ArtificialRisk FactorsSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID31022223
PMCPMC6483350
OpenAlexW2941680525

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.