ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Improved Survival of Periviable Infants after Alteration of the Threshold of Viability by the Neonatal Resuscitation Program 2015.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical and management dilemmas in the care of the newborn at the limit of viability: a narrative review.Journal of medicine and life · 2026Review
- From "can we treat?" to "should we treat?": a narrative review on resuscitation limits at the threshold of viability.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Chronic respiratory morbidity and wheeze after preterm birth: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Morbidity and Mortality Trends in Preterm Neonates at the Limits of Viability: Retrospective Observations from One Greek Hospital.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Ethical Dilemmas in Neonatal Care at the Limit of Viability.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Postnatal Serum Total Thyroxine Level Associated with Short- and Long-Term Anthropometric Outcomes in Very Preterm Infants.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Neonatal Resuscitation in Children 2021: Focus on Training, Technology, and New Clinical Approaches.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Survival and care practices of periviable births of <24 weeks' gestation-a single center retrospective study in China, 2015-2021.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Massive Gastric Hemorrhage after Indomethacin Therapy: A Rare Presentation and Critical Management in an Extremely Preterm Infant.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Postnatal Serum Total Thyroxine of Very Preterm Infants and Long-Term Neurodevelopmental Outcome.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Clinical Study of Influence of Continuous Nursing Intervention Combined with Comfort Nursing Intervention under Medical-Nursing Combination on Self-Care Ability and Satisfaction of Elderly Patients with Chronic Diseases.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
- A Global Perspective on PDA Management in the Extremely Premature: Shifting Trend Toward Transcatheter Closure.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Periviable infants (PIs) born at 22-25 weeks gestational age (wGA) have a variable survival rate (49.7-86.2%) among hospitals. One factor involved in this difference may be the definition of the threshold of viability. The American Academy of Pediatrics revised the neonatal resuscitation program in late 2015 (NRP 2015) and altered the threshold of viability from 23 to 22 wGA. The impact on the survival of PIs after the guideline alteration has seldom been discussed. Since 2016, the unit of this study has implemented the renewed guideline for PIs. We retrospectively reviewed and analyzed the survival and clinical variables of PIs before and after implementation of the guideline, which included a 10-year cohort in a single center in Taiwan. There were 168 PIs enrolled between 2010 and 2019 (Epoch-I, 2010-2015; Epoch-II, 2016-2019), after excluding those with congenital anomalies and parent-decided comfort care. Compared to those in Epoch-I, the PIs in Epoch-II had significantly higher odds ratios (2.602) (95% confidence interval: 1.170-5.789;
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.