Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32919392›Full record

ArticlePediatric research2021

Inter-device reproducibility of transcutaneous bilirubin meters.

Alida J Dam-Vervloet, Marlijn D van Erk, Nina Doorn, Stefan G J Lip, Nienke A Timmermans, Leen Vanwinsen, Foky-Anna de Boer, Henrica L M van Straaten, Nienke Bosschaart

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Bilirubin rate of rise during routine 6-h transcutaneous bilirubin surveillance.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Reconsidering transcutaneous bilirubinometry for management of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: is it time for change?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alida J Dam-VervloetMedical Physics Department, Isala hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands. a.j.dam@isala.nl.
Marlijn D van ErkBiomedical Photonic Imaging group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Nina DoornBiomedical Photonic Imaging group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Stefan G J LipBiomedical Photonic Imaging group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Nienke A TimmermansBiomedical Photonic Imaging group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Leen VanwinsenBiomedical Photonic Imaging group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Foky-Anna de BoerNeonatology Department, Isala hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Henrica L M van StraatenNeonatology Department, Isala hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Nienke BosschaartBiomedical Photonic Imaging group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
University of Twente · NLIsala · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscutaneous bilirubinometry is a widely used screening method for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. Deviation of the transcutaneous bilirubin concentration (TcB) from the total serum bilirubin concentration (TSB) is often ascribed to biological variation between patients, but variations between TcB meters may also have a role. This study aims to provide a systematic evaluation of the inter-device reproducibility of TcB meters. MATERIALS AND

methodsThirteen commercially available TcB meters (JM-105 and JM-103) were evaluated in vitro on phantoms that optically mimic neonatal skin. The mimicked TcB was varied within the clinical range (0.5-181.3 μmol/L).

resultsAbsolute differences between TcB meter outcomes increased with the measured TcB, from a difference of 5.0 μmol/L (TcB = 0.5 μmol/L phantom) up to 65.0 μmol/L (TcB = 181.3 μmol/L phantom).

conclusionThe inter-device reproducibility of the examined TcB meters is substantial and exceeds the specified accuracy of the device (±25.5 μmol/L), as well as the clinically used TcB safety margins (>50 µmol/L below phototherapy threshold). Healthcare providers should be well aware of this additional uncertainty in the TcB determination, especially when multiple TcB meters are employed in the same clinic. We strongly advise using a single TcB meter per patient to evaluate the TcB over time. IMPACT: Key message: The inter-device reproducibility of TcB meters is substantial and exceeds the clinically used TcB safety margins. What this study adds to existing literature: The inter-device reproducibility of transcutaneous bilirubin (TcB) meters has not been reported in the existing literature. This in vitro study systematically evaluates this inter-device reproducibility. IMPACT: This study aids in a better interpretation of the measured TcB value from a patient and is of particular importance during patient monitoring when using multiple TcB meters within the same clinical department. We strongly advise using a single TcB meter per patient to evaluate the TcB over time.

Indexed as

BilirubinDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEquipment DesignHumansHyperbilirubinemia, NeonatalInfant, NewbornInfant, Newborn, DiseasesInfant, PrematureMonitoring, PhysiologicNeonatal ScreeningPhantoms, ImagingReproducibility of ResultsSkin Physiological PhenomenaBilirubin

Identifiers

PMID32919392
PMCPMC8049865
OpenAlexW3084490420

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.