Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33941863›Full record

ReviewPediatric research2021

Screening methods for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: benefits, limitations, requirements, and novel developments.

Christian V Hulzebos, Libor Vitek, Carlos D Coda Zabetta, Aleš Dvořák, Paul Schenk, Eline A E van der Hagen, Christa Cobbaert, Claudio Tiribelli

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.0field-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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Christian V HulzebosBeatrix Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. c.v.hulzebos@umcg.nl.
Libor VitekInstitute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics and 4th Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Carlos D Coda ZabettaBilimetrix s.r.l., Trieste, Italy.
Aleš DvořákInstitute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics and 4th Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Paul SchenkClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Eline A E van der HagenDutch Foundation for Quality Assessment in Medical Laboratories (SKML), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Christa CobbaertClinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Claudio TiribelliItalian Liver Foundation, Trieste, Italy.
Charles University · CZLeiden University Medical Center · NLElettra-Sincrotrone Trieste S.C.p.A. · ITFondazione Italiana Fegato · ITMedicines Evaluation Board · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (SNH) is a serious condition that occurs worldwide. Timely recognition with bilirubin determination is key in the management of SNH. Visual assessment of jaundice is unreliable. Fortunately, transcutaneous bilirubin measurement for screening newborn infants is routinely available in many hospitals and outpatient settings. Despite a few limitations, the use of transcutaneous devices facilitates early recognition and appropriate management of neonatal jaundice. Unfortunately, however, advanced and often costly screening modalities are not accessible to everyone, while there is an urgent need for inexpensive yet accurate instruments to assess total serum bilirubin (TSB). In the near future, novel icterometers, and in particular optical bilirubin estimates obtained with a smartphone camera and processed with a smartphone application (app), seem promising methods for screening for SNH. If proven reliable, these methods may empower outpatient health workers as well as parents at home to detect jaundice using a simple portable device. Successful implementation of ubiquitous bilirubin screening may contribute substantially to the reduction of the worldwide burden of SNH. The benefits of non-invasive bilirubin screening notwithstanding, any bilirubin determination obtained through non-invasive screening must be confirmed by a diagnostic method before treatment. IMPACT: Key message: Screening methods for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia facilitate early recognition and timely treatment of severe neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (SNH). Any bilirubin screening result obtained must be confirmed by a diagnostic method. What does this article add to the existing literature? Data on optical bilirubin estimation are summarized. Niche research strategies for prevention of SNH are presented. Impact: Transcutaneous screening for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia contributes to the prevention of SNH. A smartphone application with optical bilirubin estimation seems a promising low-cost screening method, especially in low-resource settings or at home.

Indexed as

Neonatal ScreeningBilirubinBiomarkersEarly DiagnosisHumansHyperbilirubinemia, NeonatalInfant, NewbornJaundice, NeonatalMobile ApplicationsPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsSeverity of Illness IndexSmartphoneUp-RegulationBilirubinBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID33941863
OpenAlexW4210824110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.