ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative analysis of necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants born in Japan and born to mothers of Japanese ethnicity in California.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Interpreting the JASMINE trial in the context of Japanese neonatal care.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Analysis of NEC cases registered in the human milk bank database.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infants born in Japan are reported to have a low incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) among countries, and these differences remained significant after adjusting for common clinical factors. To investigate the impact of ethnic background, we compared the incidence of NEC between infants born in Japan and those born to mothers of Japanese ethnicity in California. Preterm infants born between 2008 and 2019 at 22-29 weeks of gestational age were analyzed retrospectively. Four groups were analyzed: infants born in Japan (JP), infants born in California to mothers born in Japan (JP-J), infants born in California to mothers with Japanese ethnicity but born in the United States or another country (JP-CA), and a comparison group of infants born in California to non-Hispanic White mothers (NHW-CA). Each cohort consisted of 52,049, 115, 226, and 12,275 infants, respectively. Unadjusted NEC incidences were significantly lower in JP compared to the other three cohorts (1.7% JP, 4.5% JP-J, 4.6% JP-CA, and 3.3% NHW-CA, respectively; p < 0.01). After adjusting for confounding factors, odds ratios for NEC in JP vs. JP-J, JP-CA, and NHW-CA were 3.04 (1.18-7.80), 2.89 (1.45-5.75), and 1.96 (1.56-2.47), respectively. This study suggests that differences in NEC incidence in Japan are not explained by ethnicity.Clinical trial regstration number: Registration numbers is UMIN000006961 ( https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000008217 ) for the Neonatal Research Network of Japan. However, the the California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative (CPQCC) aims only to assess neonatal outcomes for the purpose of quality assessment and improvement. So, no clinical trial number is available. Please refer to the web site https://www.cpqcc.org/ .
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.