Cochrane · systematic review · CD006982
Cycled light in the intensive care unit for preterm and low birth weight infants
Morag, I, Ohlsson, A · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
NeonatalAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 4 · 100%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Cycled light (CL) compared with irregular dimmed light or near darkness (ND) for preterm or low birth weight infants
Population: preterm or low birth weight infants undergoing hospital care
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight (g) at 4 months Cycled light (CL) vs irregular dimmed light or near darkness (ND) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 40 participants | Low |
Length of stay (days) (CL from 32 weeks' PMA) Cycled light (CL) vs irregular dimmed light or near darkness (ND) | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 77 participants | Low |
Cycled light (CL) compared with continuous bright light (CBL) for preterm or low birth weight infants
Population: preterm or low birth weight infants undergoing hospital care
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Length of stay (days) (CL from birth) Cycled light (CL) vs continuous bright light (CBL) | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 79 participants | Low |
Days on ventilator (CL from birth) Cycled light (CL) vs continuous bright light (CBL) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 41 participants | Low |