Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34572177›Full record

ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Brain Sparing Effect on Neurodevelopment in Children with Intrauterine Growth Restriction: A Systematic Review.

María José Benítez-Marín, Jesús Marín-Clavijo, Juan Antonio Blanco-Elena, Jesús Jiménez-López, Ernesto González-Mesa

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Developmental programming in dogs.Biology of reproduction · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Fetal Cerebral Blood Flow (Dys)autoregulation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

María José Benítez-MarínObstetrics and Gynecology Section at Surgical Specialties, Biochemistry and Immunology Department, Medicine School, Málaga University, 29071 Málaga, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2603-5477
Jesús Marín-ClavijoArts and Architecture Department, Málaga University, 29071 Málaga, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8283-3951
Juan Antonio Blanco-ElenaGeneral Surgery Service, Infanta Margarita Hospital, 14940 Cabra, Spain.
Jesús Jiménez-LópezObstetrics and Gynecology Service, Regional University Hospital of Málaga, 29011 Málaga, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7286-8656
Ernesto González-MesaObstetrics and Gynecology Section at Surgical Specialties, Biochemistry and Immunology Department, Medicine School, Málaga University, 29071 Málaga, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7106-092X
Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga · ESHospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Victoria · ESHospital Infanta MargaritaUniversidad de Málaga · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFetal growth restriction (FGR) is a pregnancy complication. Multiple studies have connected FGR to poor cognitive development, behavior disorders, and academic difficulties during childhood. Brain sparing has traditionally been defined as an adaptive phenomenon in which the brain obtains the blood flow that it needs. However, this adaptive phenomenon might not have a complete protective effect. This publication aims to systematically review the consequences of brain redistribution on neurodevelopment in children who presented with placental intrauterine growth restriction.

methodsWe performed a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. It included studies on intrauterine growth restriction or small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses, which middle cerebral artery was measured, and neurodevelopment assessed during childhood. PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant published studies.

resultsOf the 526 studies reviewed, only 12 were included. Brain sparing was associated with poor cognitive function and lower scores in IQ. Cerebral redistribution was related to better executive function and better behavior at 4 years old but not at 12 years old.

conclusionsWe can assume that fetal brain sparing could not be a fully protective phenomenon. We could not find clinical differences in behavioral and executive functions because the results were heterogeneous. Some cognitive abilities could be affected in FGR brain sparing fetuses.

Indexed as

behaviorbrain sparingcognitiveexecutive functionsintrauterine growth restrictionmotorneurodevelopment

Identifiers

PMID34572177
PMCPMC8471063
OpenAlexW3197232203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.