ReviewEClinicalMedicine2022
Global newborn health research priorities identified in 2014: A review to evaluate the uptake.
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing the burden of osteoarthritis in Australia: A 2024-2025 research priority-setting study.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2026Article
- Norms for scaling up small and sick newborn care: an overview of reviews.Journal of global health · 2025Review
- Two decades of the CHNRI method (2006-2025): Tracking its evolution and contribution to the emerging field of ideometrics.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Young Infants Clinical Signs Study 8-sign Algorithm for Identification of Sick Infants Adapted for Routine Home Visits: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of its Measurement Properties.Global pediatric health · 2024Review
- Research funding for newborn health and stillbirths, 2011-20: a systematic analysis of levels and trends.The Lancet. Global health · 2023Article
- Research priorities for care of preterm or low birth weight infants: health policy.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: In 2014, World Health Organization published global research priorities for newborn health till 2025. We conducted this review to summarize completed or ongoing research on the twenty priorities. Methods: We conducted searches for twenty questions on MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and funder websites between July 2014 and May 2022. Studies addressing research questions using adequate design were included. Adequacy of uptake of a priority was assessed based on predefined criteria. Findings: The uptake of research priorities was high for 8 (40%), moderate for 11 (55%), and one priority, effectiveness of training community health workers (CHWs) to treat neonatal sepsis at home remains unaddressed. Priorities with moderate uptake include effectiveness of simplified neonatal resuscitation programme, simple clinical algorithms for CHWs to neonatal infection, CHWs training in basic neonatal resuscitation, community-initiated kangaroo mother care, perinatal audits, and novel tocolytic agents, scaling-up chlorhexidine cord application, stable surfactant with simpler administration, accurate, affordable methods to diagnose fetal distress, strategies for prevention and treatment of intrauterine growth retardation, and causal pathways for antenatal stillbirths. Interpretation: Adequate research was undertaken on pressing global concerns in newborn health. Funders and researchers should reflect on and address less researched areas Funding: None.
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.