Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35186815›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2021

Cerebral Oximetry in Preterm Infants-To Use or Not to Use, That Is the Question.

Gorm Greisen, Mathias Lühr Hansen, Marie Isabel Skov Rasmussen, Maria Vestager, Simon Hyttel-Sørensen, Gitte Holst Hahn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gorm GreisenDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mathias Lühr HansenDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Marie Isabel Skov RasmussenDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Maria VestagerDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Simon Hyttel-SørensenDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Gitte Holst HahnDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet and Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Rigshospitalet · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Safeguarding the Brains of our smallest Children (SafeBoosC) project was initially established to test the patient-relevant benefits and harms of cerebral oximetry in extremely preterm infants in the setting of a randomized clinical trial. Extremely preterm infants constitute a small group of patients with a high risk of death or survival with brain injury and subsequent neurodevelopmental disability. Several cerebral oximeters are approved for clinical use, but the use of additional equipment may disturb and thereby possibly harm these vulnerable, immature patients. Thus, the mission statement of the consortium is "do not disturb-unless necessary." There may also be more tangible risks such as skin breakdown, displacement of tubes and catheters due to more complicated nursing care, and mismanagement of cerebral oxygenation as a physiological variable. Other monitoring modalities have relevance for reducing the risk of hypoxic-ischemic brain injury occurring during acute illness and have found their place in routine clinical care without evidence from randomized clinical trials. In this manuscript, we discuss cerebral oximetry, pulse oximetry, non-invasive electric cardiometry, and invasive monitoring of blood pressure. We discuss the reliability of the measurements, the pathophysiological rationale behind the clinical use, the evidence of benefit and harms, and the costs. By examining similarities and differences, we aim to provide our perspective on the use or non-use of cerebral oximetry in newborn infants during intensive care.

Indexed as

brainclinical benefitmonitoringnear-infrared spectroscopyoximetryrandomized trial

Identifiers

PMID35186815
PMCPMC8847778
OpenAlexW4210438036

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.