Observational studyEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Real-world use of Serial Clinical Observation in culture-proven early-onset sepsis: timing of recognition, treatment and retrospective comparison with the Neonatal Sepsis Calculator.
Observational study in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess the real-world performance of the Serial Clinical Observation (SCO) strategy in identifying and treating Early-Onset Sepsis (EOS) cases, and to compare it with the recommendations the Neonatal Sepsis Calculator (NSC) would have provided. This multicentre study analyzed prospectively culture-confirmed EOS cases caused by Group B Streptococcus (GBS) or Escherichia coli (2016-2022) in term and late-preterm infants managed with the SCO approach in Italy. We evaluated the proportion of infants assigned to routine care at birth and the time to antibiotics. NSC scores at 4, 12, and 24 h after birth were retrospectively calculated. Of 57 EOS cases, 23 (40.4%) had no maternal risk factors. Fifty infants developed clinical signs of illness either at birth (n = 24) or postnatally (n = 26). Among those symptomatic at birth, the median time to antibiotic initiation was 2.0 h (IQR 1.0-5.75). "Major" clinical signs according to the SCO protocol were present in 79.2%, prompting immediate antibiotics. Retrospective NSC application at 4 h would have recommended antibiotics in 87.5%. Of the 26 who became symptomatic after birth, 16 (61.5%) were assigned to routine care. The median time from disease onset to treatment was 6.0 h (IQR 2.0-14.0). At 4 h, NSC would have assigned 19 (73.1%) of these infants to routine care. Subtle neurological signs (i.e. hypotonia, irritability, altered consciousness) were frequently observed at onset in infants who developed severe disease.
conclusionMost EOS cases were appropriately identified among infants with clinical signs at birth, but not among those initially well-appearing. Close clinical observation throughout the first 48 h of life, along with careful attention to "major" signs-including subtle neurological signs-may improve EOS management. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The Serial Clinical Observation (SCO) strategy reduces unnecessary antibiotic use and laboratory testing in infants at risk of Early-Onset Sepsis (EOS). • However, its performance in identifying confirmed EOS cases has never been established nor compared with that of the Neonatal Sepsis Calculator (NSC). WHAT IS NEW: • Among neonates clinically ill at birth, SCO and NSC recommended immediate antibiotics in a similar proportion (79% vs 88%). • Among infants with EOS who were initially well-appearing, most were assigned to routine care under the SCO approach (62%) or would have been assigned to routine care under the NSC approach (73%). • To ensure timely recognition of EOS, universal observation of all infants over the first 24-48 h after birth may be beneficial.
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.