Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
August 1999

A Parable Wrapped in an EnigmaPopulation-Based Assessments of Outcomes Among High-Risk Neonates Are Even Less Achievable in the Age of Clinical Informatics

Author Affiliations

From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Milwaukee Clinical Campus, University of Wisconsin-Madison Medical School.


Copyright 1999 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.1999

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999;153(8):789-792. doi:10.1001/archpedi.153.8.789

A staple of the biomedical research literature in perinatal care is the article on sequelae of high-risk infants. These articles variously examine growth, cognitive, neurodevelopmental, behavioral, health, and other outcomes of low-birth-weight, preterm, or intrauterine growth–restricted neonates who survived the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or neonatal period. More recently, a new genre of articles has emerged that provides meta-analytic or systematic reviews of the results of these articles on sequelae of high-risk infants.15 A review of the purposes, analytic strategies, conclusions, and implications of these studies seems worthwhile. In this commentary, I focus especially on the comments and suggestions of other researchers who have considered the methodological complexities and study designs required for scientifically valid, clinically useful studies.610

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview