MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408380220 · doi:10.3389/fped.2025.1491976

Timing of hydrocortisone therapy in neonates with shock: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline

2025· review· en· W4408380220 on OpenAlexaff
Viraraghavan Vadakkencherry Ramaswamy, Gunjana Kumar, Abdul K. Pullattayil, Abhishek Somasekhara Aradhya, Pradeep Suryawanshi, Mohit Sahni, Supreet Khurana, Shiv Sajan Saini, K Ravishankar, Shashi Kant Dhir, Deepak Chawla, Praveen Kumar, Kiran More

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and Maternal Infections
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialRelative riskMeta-analysisHydrocortisoneConfidence intervalGuidelineInternal medicinePediatricsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The effect of the timing of initiation of hydrocortisone in neonatal shock has not been evaluated. The objective of this systematic review was to compare the effect of earlier vs. later initiation of hydrocortisone in neonatal shock. Methods: Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception until 15 May 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were eligible for inclusion. A random effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize the data. The evidence certainty was evaluated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). A clinical practice guideline was formulated as recommended by the GRADE group. Results: Of the 3,757 titles and abstracts screened, 20 studies were included: 7 RCTs and 13 non-RCTs. While clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the outcome of mortality from the meta-analysis of the RCTs [early initiation risk ratio (RR): 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-7.92; late initiation RR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.12-1.47], the non-RCTs included in the narrative review suggested that late hydrocortisone initiation might be associated with increased risk of mortality. The meta-analysis indicated that early and late hydrocortisone administration may be associated with an increased response to treatment therapy (early initiation RR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.26-2.71; late initiation RR: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.16-5.39). Late hydrocortisone initiation may increase the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) ≥ stage 2 (RR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.19-5.08). The evidence certainty was very low for most of the outcomes evaluated. Conclusion: The early use of hydrocortisone in neonates with shock requiring vasopressors is associated with better outcomes and no major adverse effects. Later institution of hydrocortisone therapy in neonatal shock may improve the response to therapy but may be associated with adverse outcomes including mortality and NEC. The results are to be interpreted with caution as the evidence certainty was predominantly very low. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023432169, identifier: CRD42023432169.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PediatricsSame topicNeonatal and Maternal InfectionsFrench-language works237,207