ArticleCureus2025
Transient Congenital Nephrotic Syndrome in Neonates: Two Case Reports and Review of Recent Literature.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
We report two cases of non-genetic transient congenital nephrotic syndrome (CNS) in neonates, both presenting with hydrops fetalis associated with nephrotic range proteinuria and significant hypoalbuminemia. Investigations did not reveal any underlying genetic cause or congenital infection to explain the nephrotic syndrome. Both cases received supportive therapy and showed spontaneous recovery with resolution of proteinuria and normalization of serum albumin in a few weeks. These cases underscore the diagnostic and prognostic uncertainties in CNS without identifiable genetic or infectious causes and highlight a possible transient or stress-induced phenotype not previously well-characterized in the literature. Furthermore, this raises the question of whether we need to redefine the definition of CNS by adding a minimum duration after which an infant will be labeled as having CNS.
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.