Outcome reporting in neonatal septic shock studies: A systematic review

Objectives
Neonatal septic shock is a critical condition requiring immediate and individualised intervention. Despite extensive research, there is a significant heterogeneity in outcome reporting across studies which may lead to incomparability of study results and limit evidence synthesis. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and analyse outcomes reported in studies focussing on interventions for neonatal septic shock to inform the development of a core outcome set to standardise outcome reporting for future research and practice.
Methods
We conducted this systematic review following the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane Library, covering all records until September 2024. Four independent reviewers performed literature screening and data extraction, with disagreements resolved by consensus among two additional reviewers. Extracted outcomes and their definitions were standardised and categorised into core areas and domains using a 38-item standardised taxonomy.
Results
From 7139 records, 25 studies involving 4957 neonates were included, yielding 136 outcomes. After consolidation, 66 unique outcomes were identified and classified into four core areas based on the established taxonomy. The most frequently reported area was physiological/clinical outcomes (72%, 18 of 25 studies), encompassing 32 outcomes. This was followed by death (68%, 17/25), resource use (48%, 12/25), and adverse events (36%, 9/25). In addition, outcomes related to life impact were not measured in the included studies.
Conclusions
This review demonstrates considerable heterogeneity in outcome reporting across neonatal septic shock studies and highlights the absence of life impact measures. These findings support the need for developing a standardised core outcome set to enhance outcome reporting consistency and clinical relevance.

Contributors

Hanmei Peng, Jing Shi, Jun Tang, Ying-Xin Li, Xia Li, Xuemei Guo, Meizhu Lu, Xingli Wan, Biru Luo, Mei Rosemary Fu, Yuan Li, Yanling Hu

Publication

Journal: Australian Critical Care
Volume: 38
Issue: 4
Pages: -
Year: 2025
DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2025.101227

Further Study Information

Current Stage: Completed
Date:
Funding source(s): This work was supported by the Sichuan Medical Association (grant number: Q2024011), the Nursing Scientific Research Project Plan of Sichuan Province Nursing Association (grant number: H23020), and the National Key R&D Program of China (grant number: 2021YFC2701704). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or prepa ration of the manuscript.


Health Area

Disease Category: Neonatal care

Disease Name: Septic shock

Target Population

Age Range: 0 - 1

Sex: Either

Nature of Intervention: Any

Stakeholders Involved

Study Type

- Systematic review of outcomes measured in trials

Method(s)

- Systematic review

We conducted this systematic review following the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane Library, covering all records until September 2024. Four independent reviewers performed literature screening and data extraction, with disagreements resolved by consensus among two additional reviewers. Extracted outcomes and their definitions were standardised and categorised into core areas and domains using a 38-item standardised taxonomy.