ArticleScientific reports2024
Development of risk prediction nomogram for neonatal sepsis in Group B Streptococcus-colonized mothers: a retrospective study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of a sensitive real-time PCR assay for Group B Streptococcus detection in vaginal-rectal swab.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Construction and validation of neonatal sepsis diagnostic nomograms: a single-site retrospective study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Clinical prediction models to diagnose neonatal sepsis in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Predictors of Length of Hospitalization for Neonatal Sepsis at Kenyatta Nation Hospital, Kenya: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Four-factor nomogram for early-onset sepsis in preterm neonates: Development and internal validation of a stewardship tool.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Neonatal clinical sepsis is recognized as a significant health problem, This study sought to identify a predictive model of risk factors for clinical neonatal sepsis. A retrospective study was conducted from 1 October 2018 to 31 March 2023 in a large tertiary hospital in China. Neonates were divided into patients and controls based on the occurrence of neonatal sepsis. A multivariable model was used to determine risk factors and construct models.The utilization and assessment of model presentation were conducted using Norman charts and web calculators, with a focus on model differentiation, calibration, and clinical applicability (DCA). Furthermore, the hospital's data from 1 April 2023 to 1 January 2024 was utilized for internal validation. In the modelling dataset, a total of 339 pairs of mothers and their newborns were included in the study and divided into two groups: patients (n = 84, 24.78%) and controls (n = 255, 75.22%). Logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the relationship between various factors and outcome. The results showed that maternal age < 26 years (odds ratio [OR] = 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-4.42, p = 0.034), maternal gestational diabetes (OR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.11-4.27, p = 0.024), forceps assisted delivery (OR = 3.76, 95% CI 1.72-5.21, p = 0.032), umbilical cord winding (OR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.32-2.67, p = 0.041) and male neonatal sex (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.00-2.62, p = 0.050) were identified as independent factors influencing the outcome of neonatal clinical sepsis. A main effects model was developed incorporating these five significant factors, resulting in an area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.713 (95% CI 0.635-0.773) for predicting the occurrence of neonatal clinical sepsis. In the internal validation cohort, the AUC value of the model was 0.711, with a 95% CI of 0.592-0.808. A main effects model incorporating the five significant factors was constructed to help healthcare professionals make informed decisions and improve clinical outcomes.
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.