Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39308394›Full record

ReviewNeonatology2024

Delivery Room Handling of the Newborn: Filling the Gaps.

Ola Didrik Saugstad, Vishal Kapadia, Maximo Vento

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neonatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ola Didrik SaugstadDepartment of Pediatric Research, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Vishal KapadiaUT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Maximo VentoInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (IISLAFE), Valencia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNewborn resuscitation algorithms have since the turn of the century been more evidence-based. In this review, we discuss the development of American Heart Association (AHA) and the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR)'s algorithm for newborn resuscitation from 1992-2024. We have also aimed to identify the remaining gaps in non-evidenced practice. SUMMARY: Of the 22 procedures reviewed in the 2020 ILCOR recommendations, the evidence was either low, very low, or non-existing. The strength of recommendation is weak or non-existing for most topics discussed. Several knowledge gaps are also summarized. The special challenge for low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is discussed. KEY MESSAGES: Newborn resuscitation is still not evidence-based, although great progress has been achieved the recent years. We have identified several knowledge gaps which should be prioritized in future research. The challenge of obtaining evidence-based knowledge from LMIC should be focused on in future research.

Indexed as

Delivery RoomsResuscitationAlgorithmsAmerican Heart AssociationDeveloping CountriesEvidence-Based MedicineHumansInfant, NewbornPractice Guidelines as TopicUnited StatesDelivery roomNewbornRecommendationsResuscitation

Identifiers

PMID39308394
PMCPMC11446302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.