Intravenous immunoglobulin for suspected or subsequently proven infection in neonates
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Congenital and nosocomial infections are important causes of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Maternal transport of immunoglobulins to the fetus mainly occurs after 32 weeks gestation and endogenous synthesis does not begin until several months after birth. Administration of intravenous immunoglobulin provides IgG that can bind to cell surface receptors, provide opsonic activity, activate complement, promote antibody dependent cytotoxicity, and improve neutrophilic chemoluminescence. Theoretically infectious morbidity and morbidity could be reduced by the administration of intravenous immunoglobulin. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) to reduce mortality/morbidity caused by suspected infection in newborn infants. In secondary analyses to assess the effectiveness of IVIG to reduce mortality/morbidity in those neonates who entered into the studies with suspected infection and who later were confirmed as being infected. SEARCH STRATEGY: Medline, Embase, and Reference Update Databases were searched in November 1997, and the Cochrane Library in July 1998 using the following keywords: immunoglobulin and infant-newborn, and random allocation, or controlled trial, or randomized controlled trial (RCT). The reference lists of identified RCTs and meta-analyses, personal files and Science Citation Index were also searched. No language restrictions were applied. Unpublished data were requested from authors and information has been obtained from one author to date. SELECTION CRITERIA: The criteria used to select studies for inclusion were: 1) DESIGN: RCT (including quasi-randomized trials) 2) Newborn infants (< 28 days old) 3) INTERVENTION: IVIG for treatment of suspected (and in some infants subsequently proved) bacterial/fungal infection compared to placebo or no intervention. Suspected infection was defined as clinical symptoms and signs consistent with infection without isolation of causative organism. Proved infection was defined as: clinical symptoms and signs consistent with infection in association with isolation of causative organism from either blood culture, cerebrospinal fluid culture, urine culture (urine obtained by suprapubic tap) or a normally sterile site (e.g., liver, spleen, meninges, lung) at autopsy. 4) At least one of the following outcomes was reported: mortality during initial hospital stay; length of hospital stay; side effects; psychomotor development/growth at follow up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently abstracted information for the outcomes of interest and one researcher (AO) checked for any discrepancies and pooled the results. Relative risk (RR) and Risk Difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed effects model are reported for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous data. NNT was calculated for outcomes that showed a statistically significant reduction in RD. Data from quasi-randomized trials were excluded in sensitivity analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Study quality was generally poor. Four of 7 identified studies (n = 208), reported on the outcomes of all randomized patients with clinically suspected infection. Mortality was reduced [RR 0.52 (95% CI; 0.28, 0.98), RD -0.102 (95% CI; -0.005, -0.199, NNT 10 (95% CI; 5, 200]. When, in a sensitivity analysis (n = 126), the results from a quasi-randomized trial (n = 82) were excluded, RR and RD remained similar, [RR 0.53 (95% CI; 0.25, 1.15), RD -0.106 (-0.232, 0.021)] but statistical significance was lost. Treatment with IVIG (six trials, n = 234) in cases of subsequently proved infection did not result in a statistically significant reduction in mortality [RR 0.62 (95% CI; 0.34, 1.12, RD -0.074 (95% CI; -0.163, 0. 014)]. Excluding in a sensitivity analysis (n = 199) a quasi-randomized trial (n = 35) changed the results slightly [RR 0. 68 (95% CI; 0.36, 1.29), RD -0.059 (-0.152, 0.035)]. There was no statistically significant between-study
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».