ArticleArchives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition2022
Individualised decision making: interpretation of risk for extremely preterm infants-a survey of UK neonatal professionals.
Article in Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cluster-randomized evaluation of neonatal intensive care unit quality improvement interventions in extremely preterm infants: secondary analysis of the INTACT trial.BMC pediatrics · 2026Trial
- Are guidelines needed? International perspectives on decision-making and practice variation in the care of extremely preterm infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Developing and validating an explainable digital mortality prediction tool for extremely preterm infants.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Supporting Antenatal Counselling for Anticipated Preterm Births at the Limits of Viability in Non-Tertiary Centres.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- At the threshold of viability: to resuscitate or not to resuscitate - the perspectives of Israeli neonatologists.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Respiratory management and outcomes in high-risk preterm infants with development of a population outcome dashboard.Thorax · 2023Article
- Opportunities and Challenges of Prognostic Models for Extremely Preterm Infants.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Conversations About End-of-Life Decisions in Neonatology: Do Doctors and Parents Implement Shared Decision-Making?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe British Association of Perinatal Medicine (BAPM) published a revised framework for perinatal management of extremely preterm infants (EPIs) in 2019. We aimed to assess UK neonatal professionals' interpretation of elements of this framework, as well as the consistency of their estimates of outcome for EPIs.
methodsAn online survey gave participants five cases involving anticipated extremely preterm birth with different favourable and unfavourable risk factors. Respondents were asked to assign a risk category and management option using the BAPM framework and to estimate the chance of survival if the baby received active resuscitation and the chance of severe disability if they survived.
resultsRespondents were consistent in interpretation of risk categories. The majority would follow parental wishes about management. Management decisions did not always correspond with risk assessment, with less inclination to recommend palliative (comfort) care. There were wide estimates of survival or severe disability (5%-90%) with consultants providing lower estimates of severe disability than other groups.
conclusionUK neonatal professionals deferred to parental wishes in the cases presented, indicating an emphasis on shared decision making. However, they did not necessarily use the risk stratification approach for management decisions. Variation in estimates of outcome raises questions about the accuracy of informed decision making and suggests support is needed for UK clinicians to incorporate risk factors into individualised counselling. There may be value in validating existing online risk calculators for UK infants or in developing a UK specific risk model.
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.