Question · asked by 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ routine monitoring vs no routine monitoring of gastric residual: Risk of necrotising enterocolitis stage ≥ 2

Summary of findings table ‐ routine monitoring showed no clear difference in risk of necrotising enterocolitis stage ≥ 2 compared with no routine monitoring of gastric residual (moderate certainty).

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Summary of findings table ‐ routine monitoring vs no routine monitoring of gastric residual
Risk of necrotising enterocolitis stage ≥ 2 · preterm infants
Summary of findings table ‐ routine monitoring showed no clear difference in risk of necrotising enterocolitis stage ≥ 2 compared with no routine monitoring of gastric residual (moderate certainty).
Routine monitoring of gastric residual for prevention of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.08 [0.46, 2.57]4 studies · 334 participantsModerate

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Routine monitoring of gastric residual for prevention of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants
2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
Not reportedlist not extracted yetNot assessed

Studies behind the findings

None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.