SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2025
Neonatal patients with melioidosis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMelioidosis is a neglected, but increasingly prevalent, tropical disease. Whilst rare in neonates, it has been associated with high mortality in this population. Despite this, little work focusing on neonatal melioidosis has been undertaken. Here, we report the first PRISMA-compliant systematic review exploring the clinical characteristics of culture- confirmed melioidosis in neonates.
methodWe searched several databases, including Web of Science, WHO Global Index, Scopus and Ovid, for primary studies reporting a case of neonatal melioidosis. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool and the Oxford Levels of Evidence. 50 neonatal cases were identified across 24 publications. Of these, 26 cases from 19 papers were reported in sufficient detail to enable analysis.
resultsAll studies identified were of poor quality, and largely consisted of case reports, with little uniformity in study reporting. However, the cases typically occurred in the early neonatal period, presented with symptoms atypical of melioidosis in other populations and showed a high mortality rate of over 65%. Importantly, instances of vertical transmission were identified, which is likely under-recognized and under-reported.
conclusionsThis review demonstrates substantial need for further work to build the evidence base surrounding this neglected pathology. Despite this, we identified a number of features of the disease in this population that may inform diagnosis and management. We also note several common barriers preventing effective treatment, including lack of a rapid diagnostic testing, lack of clinician awareness and high levels of antibiotic resistance.
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.