ArticleBMC pediatrics2024
The footprint of SARS-COV-2 infection in neonatal late sepsis.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPredicting and finding the viral agents responsible for neonatal late-sepsis has always been challenging.
methodIn this cross-sectional study, which has been done from September 2020 to December 2022, 145 hospitalized neonates suspected to late-onset sepsis alongside routine sepsis workup, were also evaluated for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-COV-2) infection, by nasopharyngeal real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or serological tests.
result145 neonates including 81 girls and 64 boys with a mean age of 12.3 ± 5.9 days and an average hospitalization stay of 23.1 ± 15.4 days were enrolled in the study. While 76.6% of them had negative bacterial culture, 63 patients (43.4%) showed evidence of SARS-COV-2 infection in RT-PCR or serology tests. None of the underlying factors including gender, age, and laboratory investigation had a significant relationship with SARS-COV-2 infection. Similarly, the outcomes of death and length of hospitalization were not different between the two groups with positive and negative SARS-COV-2 RT-PCR (P < 0.05). There was only a significant relationship between radiological changes including reticulonodular pattern, consolidation, pleural effusion, and different types of infiltrations and SARS-COV2 infection.
conclusionConsidering the widespread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in newborns, it seems logical to investigate the SARS-COV-2 infection in late-sepsis.
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.