SynthesisPediatric research2026
Next generation of non-contact and wireless vital sign monitoring technology in the neonatal intensive care unit: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Pediatric research, 2026. 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.
- Intelligent Real-Time Healthcare and Biomedical Monitoring Systems: A Narrative Review of AI, IoT, and Emerging Technologies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent vital sign monitoring uses skin sensors connected to monitors via wires. Emerging technologies include non-contact and wireless wearable systems. This systematic review aims to determine the current stage of development of these technologies and the prospect for clinical translation.
methodsA search on Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Engineering Village was conducted for studies published between January 2014 and August 2024. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data on technology, signals and feasibility, safety, and accuracy outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2; quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted.
resultsSixty observational studies were included: 43 (72%) non-contact and 17 (28%) wireless sensors. All used a reference sensor, with a median sample of 10 patients (IQR: 6-29); and median participant characteristics were moderately preterm infants around 34 weeks of age (IQR: 31-35). Studies typically monitored a single vital sign using offline data processing with good accuracy. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were driven by small samples, unclear participant selection, and limited reporting.
conclusionNext generation non-contact and wireless wearable technologies have the potential to enhance neonatal vital sign monitoring, but research addressing limitations and exploring feasibility and safety are needed. Standardized reporting frameworks and greater transparency are necessary for comparisons across studies. IMPACT: Most emerging technologies are non-contact technologies monitoring one vital sign, usually respiratory rate (RR), and a minority were wireless wearable sensors monitoring more than one vital sign usually heart rate and RR and showed good accuracy. Studies had small sample sizes, short recording durations, and exclusively focused on accuracy, and often missing important information about participants and study methodology. Wireless and non-contact technologies show promise, and this review provides recommendations to improve study design, extend recording durations, and enhance transparency in reporting and participant selection.
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.