ArticleItalian journal of pediatrics2026
A critical moment for neonatology: appeals from the Lancet Child & Adolescent Health Commission.
Article in Italian journal of pediatrics, 2026. 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
backgroundThe Lancet Child and Adolescent Health Committee on the Future of Neonatology has published an important document on the future of neonatology to highlight the significant challenges hindering the development of research in this field of medicine. MAIN BODY: The number of preclinical and clinical studies in neonatology is insufficient due to a lack of interest from industry and insufficient support from public agencies. In many countries, neonatology is not formally recognized as a medical specialty, which fosters a shortage of academic positions, with negative effects on both neonatology research and the training of young neonatologists. This situation is exacerbated by excessive bureaucracy, which hinders productive interaction with regulatory agencies and ethics committees and makes conducting randomized controlled clinical trials excessively expensive. The lack of shared standardized outcome definitions and the limited use of real-world data contribute to making neonatology research more difficult.
conclusionWe support the Commission’s proposal for a Global Alliance for Innovation in Neonatal Health (GAINH), which would include neonatologists, former patients, families, industry, and public bodies, such as governments and universities, to address and remove barriers to advancing neonatal health through high-impact research and innovation.
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.