Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 359

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cerebral Magnetic Resonance Biomarkers in Neonatal Encephalopathy: A Meta-analysis

Thayyil, Sudhin, Chandrasekaran, Manigandan, Taylor, Andrew, Bainbridge, Alan, Cady, Ernest B., Chong, W. K. Kling, Murad, Shahed, Omar, Rumana Z., Robertson, Nicola J.·2010·Pediatrics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Accurate prediction of neurodevelopmental outcome in neonatal encephalopathy (NE) is important for clinical management and to evaluate neuroprotective therapies. We undertook a meta-analysis of the prognostic accuracy of cerebral magnetic resonance (MR) biomarkers in infants with neonatal encephalopathy. METHODS: We reviewed all studies that compared an MR biomarker performed during the neonatal period with neurodevelopmental outcome at ≥1 year. We followed standard methods recommended by the Cochrane Diagnostic Accuracy Method group and used a random-effects model for meta-analysis. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves and forest plots of each MR biomarker were calculated. χ2 tests examined heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies (860 infants with NE) were included in the meta-analysis. For predicting adverse outcome, conventional MRI during the neonatal period (days 1–30) had a pooled sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87%–94%) and specificity of 51% (95% CI: 45%–58%). Late MRI (days 8–30) had higher sensitivity but lower specificity than early MRI (days 1–7). Proton MR spectroscopy deep gray matter lactate/N-acetyl aspartate (Lac/NAA) peak-area ratio (days 1–30) had 82% overall pooled sensitivity (95% CI: 74%–89%) and 95% specificity (95% CI: 88%–99%). On common study analysis, Lac/NAA had better diagnostic accuracy than conventional MRI performed at any time during neonatal period. The discriminatory powers of the posterior limb of internal capsule sign and brain-water apparent diffusion coefficient were poor. CONCLUSIONS: Deep gray matter Lac/NAA is the most accurate quantitative MR biomarker within the neonatal period for prediction of neurodevelopmental outcome after NE. Lac/NAA may be useful in early clinical management decisions and counseling parents and as a surrogate end point in clinical trials that evaluate novel neuroprotective therapies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2009-1046

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 359

Metadata

Authors
Thayyil, S., Chandrasekaran, M., Taylor, A., Bainbridge, A., Cady, E. B., Chong, W. K. K., Murad, S., Omar, R. Z., & Robertson, N. J.
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2010-02-01
Volume
125
Issue
2
Pages
e382-e395
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2090633287
Cited by
359
References
5
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cerebral Magnetic Resonance Biomarkers in Neonatal Encephalopathy: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1542/peds.2009-1046
The paper
Thayyil, S., Chandrasekaran, M., Taylor, A., Bainbridge, A., Cady, E. B., Chong, W. K. K., Murad, S., Omar, R. Z., & Robertson, N. J. (2010). Cerebral Magnetic Resonance Biomarkers in Neonatal Encephalopathy: A Meta-analysis. Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-1046

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.