ArticleGeburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde2023
Possible Rates of Detection of Neonatal Sepsis Pathogens in the Context of Microbiological Diagnostics in Mothers - Real World Data.
Article in Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the rate of detection of neonatal sepsis pathogens in maternal microbiological smears. Study Design: This is a retrospective study conducted at a Level 1 perinatal center in the context of routine care from 2014 to 2019. For all premature infants and neonates with neonatal sepsis, the neonatal and maternal microbiological findings were examined to see if there was a match. Results: During the study period, a total of 948 premature or newborn infants were identified as having a neonatal infection. Among all of the premature or newborn infants, 209 (22%) met the diagnostic criteria for neonatal sepsis; of these, 157 were premature births and 52 were full-term births. We evaluated the microbiological findings for these 209 mother and child pairs. No pathogens were detected in 27 out of 157 mothers of premature infants (17.1%) and in 31 out of 52 mothers of full-term infants (59.6%). In the premature infant group there were pairs with matching pathogens in 30 out of 130 cases (23.1%, 95% CI: 16.1-31.3), and in the full-term infant group there was a match in 4 out of 21 cases (19%, 95% CI: 5.4-41.9). The number needed to test to have a 90% probability of success for pathogen detection varies between 9 and 11 in the most favorable case and 26 and 32 in the least favorable case, depending on the evaluation method. Conclusion: In cases of neonatal sepsis, the sepsis-causing pathogen was successfully detected through prior analysis of a maternal smear in 7% of full-term infants and in 19% of premature infants. The number needed to test was relatively high in all groups. The value of maternal smears for identifying neonatal sepsis-causing pathogens needs to be critically questioned.
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.