Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36271345›Full record

ArticleBMC pediatrics2022

Comparisons of care practices for very preterm infants and their short-term outcomes in two tertiary centers in northwest and south China: A retrospective cohort study.

Haibo Peng, Yanling Shi, Fei Wang, Zhenchao Jin, Cungui Li, Jing Kang, Guofei Zhang, Lian Zhang, Yanli Yao, Zhangbin Yu

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Haibo PengDepartment of Neonatology, Shenzhen Baoan Women's and Children's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, China.
Yanling ShiDepartment of Neonatology, Qinghai Red Cross Hospital, Xining, China.
Fei WangDepartment of Neonatology, Qinghai Red Cross Hospital, Xining, China.
Zhenchao JinDepartment of Neonatology, Shenzhen Baoan Women's and Children's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, China.
Cungui LiDepartment of Neonatology, Qinghai Red Cross Hospital, Xining, China.
Jing KangDepartment of Neonatology, Qinghai Red Cross Hospital, Xining, China.
Guofei ZhangDepartment of Neonatology, Qinghai Red Cross Hospital, Xining, China.
Lian ZhangDepartment of Neonatology, Shenzhen Baoan Women's and Children's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, China.
Yanli YaoDepartment of Neonatology, Qinghai Red Cross Hospital, Xining, China. Wyyy2004706@163.com.
Zhangbin YuDepartment of Neonatology, Shenzhen People's Hospital, The Second Clinical Medical College of Jinan University, First Affiliated Hospital of Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China. yuzhangbin@126.com.
Qinghai Red Cross Hospital · CNJinan University · CNSouthern University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCare practices for very preterm infants and the mortality and morbidity of the infants vary widely among countries and regions with different levels of economic development, including the different areas in China. We aimed to compare the obstetric and delivery room practices of two representative tertiary newborn centers in the northwestern and southern regions of China and the mortality and morbidity of their very preterm infants.

methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted. Very preterm infants born between 22

resultsThree hundred and two infants in QHH and 505 infants in SZH were enrolled, and the QHH cohort was more mature than the SZH cohort was (gestational age 30.14 (29.14-31.14) vs. 29.86 (27.86-31.00 weeks, respectively), p < 0.001). Fewer antenatal steroids and more tracheal intubations were used in QHH than in SZH [(73.8% vs. 90.9%, p < 0.001) and (68.2% vs. 35.0%, p < 0.001, respectively)]. The odds of mortality [aOR = 10.31, 95%CI: (6.04, 17.61)], mortality or major morbidity [aOR = 5.95, 95%CI: (4.05, 8.74)], mortality despite active treatment [aOR = 3.14, 95%CI: (1.31, 7.53)], mortality or major morbidity despite active treatment [aOR = 3.35, 95%CI: (2.17, 5.17)], moderate or severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia [aOR = 3.66, 95%CI: (2.20, 6.06)], and severe retinopathy of prematurity [aOR = 3.24, 95%CI: (1.19, 8.83)] were higher in the QHH cohort. No significant difference in the rate of severe neurological injury or necrotizing enterocolitis ≥ Stage 2 was found between the cohorts.

conclusionObstetric and delivery room care practices used in the management of very preterm infants differed considerably between the QHH and SZH cohorts. Very preterm infants born in QHH have higher odds of mortality or severe morbidity compared with those born in SZH.

Indexed as

Infant, Newborn, DiseasesInfant, Premature, DiseasesAdultChildCohort StudiesFemaleFetal Growth RetardationGestational AgeHumansInfantInfant, Extremely PrematureInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornInfant, Very Low Birth WeightPregnancyRetrospective StudiesCare practicesChinaDelivery roomInfantMorbidityMortalityObstetricVery preterm

Identifiers

PMID36271345
PMCPMC9585866
OpenAlexW4306973571

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.