ArticleMaternal and child health journal2021
Adherence to Car Seat Tolerance Screening Differs by Indication and Patient Characteristics.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predischarge Car Seat Tolerance Screening in Preterm and At-Risk Full-Term Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2026Pooled it
- Car seat tolerance screen failure in the neonatal intensive care unit: clinical, oxygen saturation and heart rate analysis.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Consumer awareness, trust and cultural challenges in the use of child car seats in Iran: Current status and improvement strategies.PloS one · 2026Article
- The Association Between Routine Car Seat Screening and Subsequent Health Care Utilization.Hospital pediatrics · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether adherence to institutional car seat tolerance screening (CSTS) guidelines differed for infants born preterm (PTM), term low birth weight (T-LBW), or both preterm and low birth weight (P-LBW), and to examine the association between CSTS adherence and patient characteristics. STUDY
designWithin two large academic and community hospitals, we retrospectively reviewed all infants meeting institutional criteria (< 37 weeks' gestation and/or < 2.27 kg) for CSTS from 2014 to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association of patient characteristics with institutional CSTS guideline adherence.
results4374 eligible infants were born PTM (50.9%), T-LBW (6.5%), or P-LBW (42.6%). Adherence rates were 92.7% in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and 95.2% in the well-baby nursery with initial CSTS failure rates of 6.1% and 9.9%, respectively. Adherence was lowest among T-LBW (80.7%) compared to PTM (95.1%) or P-LBW (92.2%) infants in the NICU (p < 0.001) and well-baby nursery (81.6%, 96.7% and 97.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). In bivariate analyses, gestational age, birth weight, insurance, race, hospital type, discharge year, and preferred language were associated with adherence. In fully-adjusted models, adherence was positively associated with lower gestational age, higher birth weight, non-Medicaid insurance, and later discharge year (NICU) and lower gestational age and later discharge year (well-baby nursery).
conclusionsAdherence was lower for T-LBW than PTM or P-LBW infants, despite similar CSTS failure rates. Disparities in adherence among Medicaid-insured patients in the NICU warrant further study. Future studies are needed to clarify the benefit of CSTS and increase adherence in high-risk populations.
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.