ArticleBMJ open2022
Better assessment of neonatal jaundice at home (BEAT Jaundice @home): protocol for a prospective, multicentre diagnostic study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Community-based monitoring of neonatal jaundice using the point-of-care Bilistick® System 2.0.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Accuracy of non-invasive smartphone bilirubin measurements on neonates before and during phototherapy.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Assessing Diagnostic Accuracy of a Handheld Point-of-Care Device for Quantifying Neonatal Bilirubin Levels: The BEAT Jaundice @Home Study.Neonatology · 2026Article
- Universal Transcutaneous Bilirubin Screening in a Midwifery-Led Home Care Setting.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Home-based phototherapy for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: A one-time Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program Survey.Paediatrics & child health · 2025Article
- Clinical superiority of artificial intelligence-enabled jaundice monitoring follow-up combined with end-tidal carbon monoxide measurement in neonatal jaundice management.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Demystifying non-invasive approaches for screening jaundice in low resource settings: a review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSevere neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia can place a neonate at risk for acute bilirubin encephalopathy and kernicterus spectrum disorder. Early diagnosis is essential to prevent these deleterious sequelae. Currently, screening by visual inspection followed by laboratory-based bilirubin (LBB) quantification is used to identify hyperbilirubinaemia in neonates cared for at home in the Netherlands. However, the reliability of visual inspection is limited. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of universal transcutaneous bilirubin (TcB) screening as compared with visual inspection to: (1) increase the detection of hyperbilirubinaemia necessitating treatment, and (2) reduce the need for heel pricks to quantify bilirubin levels. In parallel, we will evaluate a smartphone app (Picterus), and a point-of-care device for quantifying total bilirubin (Bilistick) as compared with LBB. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will undertake a multicentre prospective cohort study in nine midwifery practices across the Netherlands. Neonates born at a gestational age of 35 weeks or more are eligible if they: (1) are at home at any time between days 2 and 8 of life; (2) have their first midwife visit prior to postnatal day 6 and (3) did not previously receive phototherapy. TcB and the Picterus app will be used after visual inspection. When LBB is deemed necessary based on visual inspection and/or TcB reading, Bilistick will be used in parallel. The coprimary endpoints of the study are: (1) hyperbilirubinaemia necessitating treatment; (2) the number of heel pricks performed to quantify LBB. We aim to include 2310 neonates in a 2-year period. Using a decision tree model, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Medical Research Ethical Committee of the Erasmus MC Rotterdam, Netherlands (MEC-2020-0618). Parents will provide written informed consent. The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register (NL9545).
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.