MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236487734 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001239

Intravenous immunoglobulin for suspected or subsequently proven infection in neonates

2001· review· en· W4236487734 on OpenAlexaff
Arne Ohlsson, JB Lacy

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialAntibodyPediatricsPlaceboCochrane LibraryClinical trialPregnancyImmunologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 Unpublished data were requested from authors and information has been obtained from one author to date.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

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207