Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36269293›Full record

SynthesisJournal of global health2022

Universal newborn eye screening: a systematic review of the literature and review of international guidelines.

Aeesha Nj Malik, Jennifer R Evans, Shuchita Gupta, Silvio Mariotti, Iris Gordon, Richard Bowman, Clare Gilbert

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of global health, 2022. 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
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Infant sensory gating and a developmental cascade to autistic traits and anxiety.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Aeesha Nj MalikDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jennifer R EvansDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Shuchita GuptaDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health (‎MCA), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Silvio MariottiDepartment of Noncommunicable Diseases, Eye and Vision Care, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Iris GordonDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Richard BowmanDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Clare GilbertDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBWorld Health Organization · CHQueen's University Belfast · GB

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of universal screening for newborn eye abnormalities compared with no screening in improving infant vision and health outcomes. Methods: We searched CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Global Index Medicus, clinical trials databases, and bibliographies of relevant articles. We included randomized and observational studies of all newborns, regardless of illness or risk factors, that compared universal screening for any eye abnormality by eight weeks of age with no universal screening. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We also reviewed available recommendations on newborn eye screening. Results: Fourteen studies were identified but only three compared universal red reflex screening with no screening. Findings suggest that universal red reflex testing in maternity wards (MWs) may increase the number of newborns with congenital cataracts referred for eye care from MWs or well-baby clinics (WBCs) in the first year of life (risk ratio (RR) = 9.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.36-71.20; low certainty evidence). However, the effect of screening in WBC is uncertain (RR = 6.62, 95% CI = 0.87-50.09). The effect of MW or WBC screening on referral from any health care facility (MWs, WBCs, paediatrician clinic, other) in the first year is uncertain (MW screening: RR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.63-2.39; WBC screening: RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.46-2.05). However, referral or surgery by 6 weeks of age may be higher with universal MW screening (early referral: RR = 4.61, 95% CI = 1.12-19.01; early surgery: RR = 8.23, 95% CI = 1.13-59.80; low certainty evidence). The effect of WBC screening on early referral and surgery is uncertain (early referral: RR = 1.98, 95% CI = 0.43-9.19; early surgery: RR = 3.97, 95% CI = 0.50-31.33; very low certainty evidence). Universal red reflex testing may increase clinical conjunctivitis (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.01-1.47; low certainty evidence) but the effect on confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis is uncertain (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.76-1.90; very low-certainty evidence). Nine guidelines recommended universal newborn eye screening using red reflex testing. Conclusions: Evidence supports the role of red reflex testing shortly after birth to increase early identification, referral, and surgery for congenital cataracts.

Indexed as

CataractFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID36269293
PMCPMC9586142
OpenAlexW4307032980

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.