ReviewNeonatology2026
2025 American and European Guidelines on Neonatal Resuscitation: Concordance and Differences.
Review in Neonatology, 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
backgroundNeonatal resuscitation guidelines are periodically updated to reflect advances in evidence and clinical practice. In October 2025, the American Heart Association-American Academy of Pediatrics (AHA-AAP) and the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) released updated neonatal resuscitation guidelines, both based on the scientific evaluations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Despite this shared foundation, relevant differences remain between the two documents in terms of scope, structure, and specific clinical recommendations. SUMMARY: We reviewed the documents, identified several areas of divergence, and reached a qualitative consensus about their clinical importance. This narrative review compares the 2025 AHA-AAP and ERC guidelines, focusing on algorithm design, initial stabilization, ventilation strategies, and oxygen administration. Both guidelines promote a gentle, physiology-based approach to neonatal transition and emphasize family-centered care. However, they diverge in several areas, including the complexity of resuscitation algorithms, the management of ventilation, and recommendations for initial inspired oxygen concentration. Many of these differences reflect variations in the scope of the documents rather than conflicting interpretations of evidence. KEY MESSAGES: Several recommendations continue to rely on limited data and reflect a consensus of expert opinion. Persistent gaps in knowledge underscore the need for further high-quality research to inform future updates and support greater harmonization of neonatal resuscitation practices.
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.