ReviewCureus2022
Neonatal Jaundice and Autism: Precautionary Principle Invocation Overdue.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Analysis of Obstetric Nursing Interventions for Home Monitoring of Neonatal Jaundice.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Pre-autism: What a paediatrician should know about early diagnosis of autism.World journal of clinical pediatrics · 2023Review
- Causal relationships of neonatal jaundice, direct bilirubin and indirect bilirubin with autism spectrum disorder: A two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meta-analyses consistently find a substantial possible association between neonatal jaundice (hyperbilirubinemia) and later autism risk. The obvious question this poses is "what is the source of this risk?" This review explores the complementary roles of jaundice severity and time, racial and geographic disparities, and early infant feeding regime change, and discusses potential implications of these findings. A range of factors appears to increase the risk of autism development following neonatal jaundice, all of which are associated with the "exclusive breastfeeding" paradigm. Severity presents an intuitive risk factor in the context of bilirubin neurotoxicity; jaundice from the modal root cause of insufficient milk intake progresses as that condition persists. Racial and geographic disparities present another intuitive set of risk factors, including a heightened risk of missed diagnosis for darker-skinned neonates and delayed care access in poorer settings. In addition to these intuitive factors, near- or full-term as opposed to preterm status and phototherapy treatment may also heighten risk. These counter-intuitive findings provide additional support for deprivation/starvation as a crucial antecedent or independent variable, and time as a mediator to progression in and subsequent risk from jaundice; heightened medical monitoring and supplementation seem to protect preterms, and phototherapy risks iatrogenesis, having replaced without sufficient safety evidence the prior standard treatment of switching jaundiced, breastfed babies to formula. Critically, jaundice associated with insufficient milk intake due to breastfeeding insufficiencies is fully preventable and trivially treatable with appropriate supplemental milk. Feeding neonates adequately may play an important role in preventing autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, hearing impairment, learning disorders, and mood disorders. Precautionary principle invocation is overdue.
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.