ReviewWiener klinische Wochenschrift2025
40 years neonatology : An academic life.
Review in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2025. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA complete review of the development of neonatology in the last 40 years would probably require a compendium with several volumes, to bring to view the remarkable improvements in survival rates and neurodevelopmental outcomes of ill babies in Austria, most industrial countries and to some extent worldwide. The challenge I had to solve here was to integrate my own contributions to the field of neonatology during this period and particularly the contributions of my team from the Division of Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics and Adolescence Medicine, Medical University Vienna where I was working first as an intern and resident and later had the privilege to become head of department.
aimThis very personal review was conceived to showcase the milestones of neonatology where, in my opinion, our department made some meaningful contributions in research and clinical practice during the past 40 years.
methodsA total of 10 areas of interest were selected which most likely influenced survival rates of preterm infants born at increasingly younger gestational ages and ameliorated long-term clinical and neurodevelopmental outcomes, including: 1) Construction and continuous modernization of neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). 2) Installation of the "Regionalization Program for NICUs in Vienna". 3) Treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) of premature babies. 4) Fine tuning of glucose metabolism for growth and outcome. 5) Neurodevelopmental care. 6) Neonatal hematology. 7) Infection control. 8) The toxoplasma screening program. 9) The newborn screening program. 10) Quality control: the Vermont Oxford Neonatal Network (VONN).
resultsOver the past four decades advancements in research and technology have allowed a transformative development of neonatal medicine. Survival rates without increased morbidity for very premature infants with gestational ages reaching to what we consider nowadays the border of viability have constantly increased. In my professional life as a neonatologist in Austria I have had the possibility to support and shape some of these developments together with my team.
conclusionAs we look ahead it is imperative to build upon the progress made, harnessing the power of science and technology to further improve the survival and quality of life for preterm infants in Austria and worldwide. At the same time, neonatology must continue to prioritize ethical reflection and education, fostering a culture of integrity, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the development of guidelines and protocols that uphold ethical standards while addressing the evolving needs and complexities of neonatal medicine.
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.