ArticleNIHR open research2023
Comparison of clinical outcomes between active and permissive blood pressure management in extremely preterm infants.
Article in NIHR open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy of volume expansion, inotropes and vasopressors in preterm neonates with probable transitional circulatory instability in the first week of life: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Pooled it
- Neonatal Shock: Current Dilemmas and Future Research Avenues.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Monitoring and evaluation of hypotension in the extremely preterm.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Editorial: Biomarkers of gut blood flow, oxygenation, inflammation and NEC in neonates.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes between active and permissive blood pressure management in extremely preterm infants.NIHR open research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There remains uncertainty about the definition of normal blood pressure (BP), and when to initiate treatment for hypotension for extremely preterm infants. To determine the short-term outcomes of extremely preterm infants managed by active compared with permissive BP support regimens during the first 72 hours of life. Method: This is a retrospective medical records review of 23 Results: There were 764 infants admitted to the participating hospitals; 671 (88%) were included in the analysis (263 Conclusions: There was no difference in mortality or IVH between the two BP management approaches. Active BP support may reduce NEC. This should be investigated prospectively in large multicentre randomised studies.
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.