Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33468526›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2021

Systematic review of global clinical practice guidelines for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.

Meng Zhang, Jun Tang, Yang He, Wenxing Li, Zhong Chen, Tao Xiong, Yi Qu, Youping Li, Dezhi Mu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical practice guidelines for the nutrition of colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

9 authors.

Meng ZhangDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Jun TangDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China tj1234753@sina.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4884-4248
Yang HeDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Wenxing LiDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Zhong ChenDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Tao XiongDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0408-1288
Yi QuDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Youping LiChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Sichuan University West China Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Dezhi MuDepartment of Pediatrics, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHyperbilirubinemia is one of the most common clinical symptoms in newborns. To improve patient outcomes, evidence-based and implementable guidelines are required. However, clinical guidelines may vary in quality, criteria and recommendations among regions and countries. In this study, we aimed to systematically assess the quality of guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE)-II instrument and summarise the specific recommendations for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia in order to provide suggestions for future guideline development.

designSystematic review.

interventionsWe searched the PubMed, Embase, Medline and guideline databases for relevant articles on 10 April 2020. The studies were screened by two independent reviewers according to our inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted the descriptive data. Four appraisers assessed the guidelines using the AGREE-II instrument.

resultsOur systematic review appraised 12 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. The 12 guidelines achieved an average score of 36%-89%. The guidelines received the highest scores for clarity of presentation and lowest scores for rigour of development. Most recommendations for diagnosis were relatively consistent, but recommendations regarding risk factors, the initiating threshold of treatment and pharmacotherapy varied.

conclusionsOur study revealed that current guidelines vary in the quality of the developing process and are inconsistent with regards to recommendations. Future guidelines should afford more attention to the quality of methodologies in guideline development, and more qualified evidence is needed to standardise the initiating threshold of treatment for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.

Indexed as

Hyperbilirubinemia, NeonatalDatabases, FactualHumansInfant, Newborndevelopmental neurology & neurodisabilityneonatologyprotocols & guidelines

Identifiers

PMID33468526
PMCPMC7817798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.