Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35087845›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021

Validity of Apgar Score as an Indicator of Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Scoping Review.

Melissa Chao, Carlo Menon, Mohamed Elgendi

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Melissa ChaoFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Carlo MenonBiomedical and Mobile Health Technology Laboratory, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mohamed ElgendiBiomedical and Mobile Health Technology Laboratory, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had profound impacts on healthcare systems worldwide, particularly regarding the care of pregnant women and their neonates. The use of the Apgar score-a discrete numerical index used to evaluate neonatal condition immediately following delivery that has been used ubiquitously as a clinical indicator of neonatal condition and widely reported in the literature for decades-has continued during the pandemic. Although health systems adopted protocols that addressed pregnant women and their neonates during the pandemic, limited research has assessed the validity of Apgar scores for determining neonatal conditions in the context of COVID-19. Therefore, this scoping review was conducted on the first 2 years of the pandemic and included mothers with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 and their resulting positive or negative neonates. In total, 1,966 articles were assessed for eligibility, yielding 246 articles describing 663 neonates. Neonates who tested negative had median Apgar scores of 9 and 9 at 1 and 5 mins, respectively, while test-positive neonates had median Apgar scores of 8 and 9 at the same time points. The proportions of test-negative neonates with Apgar scores below 7 were 29 (4%) and 11 (2%) at 1 and 5 mins, which was not statistically significant (

Indexed as

COVID-19diagnosisneonatesphysical examinationpregnancyscore assessmentscreening toolwell-being

Identifiers

PMID35087845
PMCPMC8787091
OpenAlexW4205102563

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.