ArticleIndian journal of pediatrics2023
Clinical Evaluation of a Wireless Device for Monitoring Vitals in Newborn Babies.
Article in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Framework to Evaluate Feasibility, Safety, and Accuracy of Wireless Sensors in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Oxygen Saturation Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Wearable biosensors for pediatric hospitals: a scoping review.Pediatric research · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the ability of the Nemocare Raksha (NR), an internet of things (IoT)-enabled device, to continuously monitor vitals for 6 h and its safety in newborns. The accuracy of the device was also compared with the readings from the standard device used in the pediatric ward.
methodForty neonates (either gender) weighing ≥ 1.5 kg were included in the study. Heart rate, respiratory rate, body temperature, and oxygen saturation was measured using the NR and compared with standard care devices. Safety was assessed by monitoring for skin changes and local rise in temperature. The neonatal infant pain scale (NIPS) was used to assess pain and discomfort.
resultA total of 227 h of observations (5.67 h per baby) were obtained. No discomfort or device-related adverse events were noted during the study period. The mean difference between the NR and the standard monitoring was 0.66 (0.42 to 0.90) for temperature (°C); -6.57 (-8.66 to -4.47) for heart rate (bpm); 7.60 (6.52 to 8.68) for respiratory rate (breaths per minute); -0.79 (-1.10 to -0.48) for oxygen saturation (%). The level of agreement analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was good for heart rate [ICC 0.77 (0.72 to 0.82); p value < 0.001] and oxygen saturation [ICC 0.80 (0.75 to 0.84); p value < 0.001]; moderate for body temperature [ICC 0.54 (0.36 to 0.60); p value < 0.001] and poor for respiratory rate [ICC 0.30 (0.10 to 0.44); p value 0.002].
conclusionThe NR was able to seamlessly monitor vital parameters in neonates without any safety concern. The device showed a good level of agreement for heart rate and oxygen saturation among the four parameters measured.
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.