ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Female-Inclusive Selective Versus Universal Neonatal Hip Ultrasonography Screening for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this study was to compare outcomes of universal versus female-inclusive selective ultrasonography screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in a neonatal population.
methodsThis prospective cohort study evaluated two consecutive screening strategies at a single institution: a universal ultrasonography program (2019-2020;
resultsDDH detection rates were identical between cohorts (1.7%). In the universal cohort, six infants had dysplastic hips; in the selective cohort, five infants were affected, all females. Among these, 40% had no major risk factors. The proportions of mature and immature hips were comparable between cohorts. Screening efficiency was similar (number needed to screen: 59 vs. 58), despite a substantially reduced number of scans in the selective program.
conclusionsA selective screening program that includes all female neonates achieved DDH detection rates comparable to universal screening while significantly reducing imaging volume. As all dysplastic cases occurred in girls, this female-inclusive approach captured the highest-risk demographic without relying solely on traditional risk factors. Incorporating sex-based eligibility into selective screening may provide a safe and efficient framework for DDH screening programs in diverse clinical settings.
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.