FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2146315511> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2146315511 endingPage "1316" @default.
• W2146315511 startingPage "1315" @default.
• W2146315511 abstract "We read with interest the letter by Whelan concerning the joint American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Fetus and Newborn and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice policy statement on the Apgar score.1 Whelan is correct to state that some confusion exists concerning the Apgar score as a predictor of outcome, and we cited both sides of this discussion. In addition, as we point out in the statement, misuse of the Apgar score may lead to an erroneous definition of asphyxia. However, we take issue with her assertion that this statement was “[c]learly driven by an effort to oppose the use of low Apgar scores as litigious weapons.” We wished to point out the problems of prediction with either low or high scores. Nelson and Ellenberg2,3 have demonstrated that an Apgar score of 0 to 3 at 5 minutes correlated poorly with future neurologic outcome and that a score of 0 to 3 at 5 minutes was associated with an increased risk of cerebral palsy in only 0.3% to 1.0% of term infants. On the other hand, a score that may be high because of the assistance of resuscitation may lead to the erroneous prediction of a neurologically normal infant. The committees chose not to discuss the Apgar score at 10, 15, and 20 minutes, because extended low scores have high positive predictive values for neurologic disability.We thank Rüdiger et al for their letter, also. We agree that the subjective assessments of 3 components of the score (color, reflex irritability, and tone) can lead to the variations in scoring that they describe. Because the components of the Apgar score are the most consistent part of any labor and delivery summary throughout the world, we elected not to alter its components, as Rüdiger et al propose. We are hopeful that our proposed expanded reporting form and the term “assisted Apgar score” will help in both data collection and prognosis and look forward to studies that will test their value.Iyer's proposal to stop using the Apgar score to evaluate the newborn has been suggested before,4 and a review elsewhere5 contains observations that remain valid despite widespread adoption of the evidence-based Neonatal Resuscitation Program. We think that the Apgar score remains useful, and we hope that use of the expanded scoring sheet will add to the information necessary for evaluation of long-term outcomes." @default.
• W2146315511 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2146315511 creator A5057346319 @default.
• W2146315511 creator A5084108007 @default.
• W2146315511 date "2006-09-01" @default.
• W2146315511 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2146315511 title "The Apgar Score: In Reply" @default.
• W2146315511 cites W1989518115 @default.
• W2146315511 cites W2143458217 @default.
• W2146315511 cites W2318960111 @default.
• W2146315511 doi "https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-1558" @default.
• W2146315511 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2146315511 type Work @default.
• W2146315511 sameAs 2146315511 @default.
• W2146315511 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2146315511 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2146315511 hasAuthorship W2146315511A5057346319 @default.
• W2146315511 hasAuthorship W2146315511A5084108007 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C172680121 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C187212893 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C2777026412 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C2778052368 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C2779234561 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C2779421357 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C2779914510 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C2781140086 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C11171543 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C15744967 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C172680121 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C17744445 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C1862650 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C187212893 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C199539241 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C2777026412 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C2778052368 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C2779234561 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C2779421357 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C2779914510 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C2781140086 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C54355233 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C71924100 @default.
• W2146315511 hasConceptScore W2146315511C86803240 @default.
• W2146315511 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2146315511 hasLocation W21463155111 @default.
• W2146315511 hasOpenAccess W2146315511 @default.
• W2146315511 hasPrimaryLocation W21463155111 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W1506939305 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2129822079 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2146315511 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2347576190 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2387476922 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2516974150 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W4205454917 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W4327649138 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2127274192 @default.
• W2146315511 hasRelatedWork W2183631118 @default.
• W2146315511 hasVolume "118" @default.
• W2146315511 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2146315511 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2146315511 magId "2146315511" @default.
• W2146315511 workType "article" @default.