RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Clinical prediction models to diagnose neonatal sepsis in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.09.05.24313133
DO 10.1101/2024.09.05.24313133
A1 Neal, Samuel R
A1 Sturrock, Sarah
A1 Musorowegomo, David
A1 Gannon, Hannah
A1 Zaman, Michele
A1 Cortina-Borja, Mario
A1 Doare, Kirsty Le
A1 Heys, Michelle
A1 Chimhini, Gwen
A1 Fitzgerald, Felicity
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/09/13/2024.09.05.24313133.abstract
AB Neonatal sepsis causes significant morbidity and mortality worldwide but is difficult to diagnose clinically. Clinical prediction models (CPMs) could improve diagnostic accuracy. Neonates in low- income and middle-income countries are disproportionately affected by sepsis, yet no review has comprehensively synthesised CPMs validated in this setting. We performed a scoping review of CPMs for neonatal sepsis diagnosis validated in low-income and middle-income countries. From 4598 unique records, we included 82 studies validating 44 distinct models. Most studies were set in neonatal intensive or special care units in middle-income countries and included neonates already suspected of sepsis. Three quarters of models were only validated in one study. Our review highlights several literature gaps, particularly a paucity of studies validating models in low-income countries and the WHO African region, and models for the general neonatal population.Furthermore, heterogeneity in study populations, definitions of sepsis and reporting of models may hinder progress in this field.Competing Interest StatementFF and MH are trustees of Neotree, a UK registered charity that provides technology, software information, education and support to healthcare workers and medical practitioners throughout England and Wales, Malawi and Zimbabwe (charity number: 1186748). All other authors declare no competing interests.Clinical Protocols https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/8/e039712 Funding StatementThis review was conducted without specific funding support.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, Cochrane Library.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesExtracted data and code used to synthesise results will be uploaded at publication. A list of all records identified through database searches is available on request.