Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33961715›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021

Topical emollient for preventing infection in preterm infants.

Jemma Cleminson, William McGuire

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05461404 (Emollient Therapy for Improved Survival and Growth of Very Low Birth Weight Infants in Zimbabwe), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT05461404 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Emollient Therapy for Improved Survival and Growth of Very Low Birth Weight Infants in Zimbabwe

TypeinterventionalSponsorStanford UniversityRan2023 to 2025Enrolled520ConditionsVery Low Birth Weight InfantArmsTopical Emollient Therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Seeing beyond the obvious: pragmatic skin care guidance for infants 22-24 weeks gestational age.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jemma CleminsonCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
William McGuireCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreakdown of the developmentally immature epidermal barrier may permit entry for micro-organisms leading to invasive infection in preterm infants. Topical emollients may improve skin integrity and barrier function and thereby prevent invasive infection, a major cause of mortality and morbidity in preterm infants.

objectivesTo assess the effect of topical application of emollients (ointments, creams, or oils) on the risk of invasive infection and mortality in preterm infants. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL via Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS) Web and MEDLINE via Ovid (updated 08 January 2021) and the reference lists of retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of prophylactic application of topical emollient on the risk of invasive infection, mortality, other morbidity, and growth and development in preterm infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methods of Cochrane Neonatal. Two review authors separately evaluated trial quality, extracted data, and synthesised effect estimates using risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and mean difference. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for effects on mortality and invasive infection. MAIN

resultsWe included 22 trials with a total of 5578 infant participants. The main potential sources of bias were lack of clarity on the methods used to generate random sequences and conceal allocation in half of the trials, and lack of masking of parents, caregivers, clinicians, and investigators in all of the trials. Eight trials (2086 infants) examined the effect of topical ointments or creams. Most participants were very preterm infants cared for in healthcare facilities in high-income countries. Meta-analyses suggested that topical ointments or creams may have little or no effect on invasive infection (RR 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.31; low certainty evidence) or mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08; low certainty evidence). Fifteen trials (3492 infants) assessed the effect of topical plant or vegetable oils. Most of these trials were undertaken in low- or middle-income countries and were based in healthcare facilities. One large (2249 infants) community-based trial occurred in a rural field practice in India. Meta-analyses suggested that topical oils may reduce invasive infection (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.96; I² = 52%; low certainty evidence) but have little or no effect on mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08, I² = 3%; low certainty evidence). One trial (316 infants) that compared petroleum-based ointment versus sunflower seed oil in very preterm infants in Bangladesh showed little or no effect on invasive infection (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.46; low certainty evidence), but suggested that ointment may lower mortality slightly (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98; RD -0.12, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.01; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome 8, 95% CI 4 to 100; low certainty evidence). One trial (64 infants) that assessed the effect of coconut oil versus mineral oil in preterm infants with birth weight 1500 g to 2000 g in India reported no episodes of invasive infection or death in either group (very low certainty evidence). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe level of certainty about the effects of emollient therapy on invasive infection or death in preterm infants is low. Since these interventions are mostly inexpensive, readily accessible, and generally acceptable, further good-quality randomised controlled trials in healthcare facilities, and in community settings in low- or middle-income countries, may be justified.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalBacterial InfectionsBiasCross InfectionDermatitisEmollientsHumansInfant, Extremely PrematureInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureInfant, Premature, DiseasesMycosesOintmentsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSkin CareEmollientsOintments

Identifiers

PMID33961715
PMCPMC8104155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.