ArticleTaiwan journal of ophthalmology
Accuracy of the postnatal growth and retinopathy of prematurity screening criteria in predicting prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity in the tertiary hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Article in Taiwan journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of the postnatal growth and retinopathy of prematurity screening criteria in predicting prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity in the tertiary hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
- Accuracy of the postnatal growth and retinopathy of prematurity screening criteria in predicting prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity in the tertiary hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe postnatal growth and retinopathy of prematurity (G-ROP), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) predictive model, was developed in North America with high sensitivity and fewer infants examined. This study aimed to validate this model in Thai infants by assessing sensitivity and comparing it to the current American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) screening guideline. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe records of infants screened for ROP were retrospectively reviewed from 2015 to 2020. G-ROP model was applied to calculate sensitivity for prethreshold type 1 and 2 ROP and the reduction of the number of infants examined.
resultsOf 129 infants screened, there were 102 infants who met G-ROP criteria. The mean gestational age at birth was 29.7 ± 2.7 weeks. The mean birth weight was 1177.8 ± 401.3 g. Both G-ROP and AAO detected prethreshold type 1 ROP in 24 of 24 infants (sensitivity, 100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 85.8%-100%). Furthermore, they detected all four infants prethreshold type 2 ROP with 100% of sensitivity (95% CI, 39.8-100.0). The reduction in infants receiving examinations using G-ROP was 20.9%.
conclusionsG-ROP model provided high sensitivity and lessen unnecessary examinations for ROP screening in Thai infants.
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.