ArticleZeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie2021
[Quality of Care for Very Low Birth Weight Infants in Germany - Evaluation of Publicly Available Data from 2014 to 2018].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie, 2021. 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.
- Effectiveness of structured lactation support and human donor milk banking in German NICUs: a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial.BMC medicine · 2026Trial
- Current skin care practices in very low birth weight infants in German Neonatal Intensive Care Units - results from a cross-sectional survey.Molecular and cellular pediatrics · 2026Article
- Diving into the Digital Landscape: Assessing the Quality of Online Information on Neonatal Jaundice for Parents.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Centralization as the key survival benefit in acute neonatal surgery.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSince 2014 outcome data for the treatment of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants in Germany have been available at www.perinatalzentren.org. This study explores the relationship between volume of VLBW infants and outcome.
methodsVolumes of VLBW infants for each perinatal centre are available for the 5-year period from 2014 to 2018, and survival and survival without severe morbidity in relation to the national average survival rate is reported. In addition to volume an adjusted volume is specified considering several risk factors. Using regression, the relationship between volume, adjusted volume and survival was investigated.
resultsOf 212 perinatal centres 163 (77%) were level 1 centres (highest level in Germany) and 49 (23%) were level 2 centres caring for 9300 (94%; median 51; min 13 max 186) and 538 (6%; 9; 4-28) VLBW infants per year, respectively. No significant correlation between volume and survival and survival w/o severe morbidity was found. Adjusted volumes showed a weak linear correlation to survival w/o severe morbidity (p=0.02, R2=0.03). Non-parametric regression was significant for adjusted volumes of more than 170 (survival) and 100 (survival w/o severe morbidity) VLBW infants per year and centre, respectively. Below these limits volume does not affect variation.
conclusionLinear and non-linear regression between adjusted volumes and survival was only weak and was driven by the very large perinatal centres.
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.