Under-recognized or Under-reported? A Global Bibliometric Analysis (1994-2025) of Neurological Assessment in Pediatric Intensive Care Units
Rodrigues, J. C. M.; da Conceicao, B. C.; Pantoja, L. V. P. S.; Machado-Ferraro, K. M.; Maia, M. L. F.; Souza-Junior, F. J. C.; Lima, R. R.; Cunha, R. A.; de Castro, R. E. V.; Bezerra, F.; Fernandes, L. M. P.; Fontes-Junior, E. A.; Maia, C.
Show abstract
Critically ill children admitted to pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) face significant neurological risks, but it remains unclear whether neurological assessments are adequately integrated into clinical routines. We aimed to evaluate the global scientific landscape regarding neurological examination in PICU, combining bibliometric analysis with clinical-guided critical analysis. A comprehensive search was conducted on the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS-CC) using terms related to pediatric critical care and neurological evaluation. Eligible publications were original research articles approaching neurological assessment during PICU stay. Bibliometric indicators, science mapping, and study design profiling were analyzed. In a separate, clinically guided interpretative layer, reporting patterns related to timing, tools, and strategies of neurological assessment were synthesized. From 359 records, 128 articles met inclusion criteria. The United States accounted for over half of the publications, while most studies employed retrospective designs and focused on traumatic brain injury or cardiac arrest. Despite the relevance of clinical neurological examination - especially using the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category (PCPC), advanced neuromonitoring tools, e.g., EEG, intracranial pressure monitoring, and biomarkers were inconsistently applied. Notably, neurological evaluations were often underreported at admission and discharge and rarely extended to non-neurological PICU conditions. Our findings reveal a critical gap between the neurological vulnerability of PICU patients, and the limited, inconsistent assessment strategies reported in the literature. Expanding structured neurological evaluation to all critically ill children, not only those with overt neurological diagnoses, seems essential to promote brain health and long-term recovery.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Unpublished clinical studies in pediatric emergence delirium - a cross sectional analysis 93%
- Management and outcomes of myelomeningocele-associated hydrocephalus in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol 92%
- Towards definitions of critical illness and critical care using concept analysis 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Connectome-Based Approach to Assess Motor Outcome after Neonatal Arterial Ischemic Stroke 90%
- How Many Patients Do You Need? Investigating Trial Designs for Anti-Seizure Treatment in Acute Brain Injury Patients 89%
- Brainstem and cerebellar volume loss and the associated clinical features in Progressive Supranuclear Palsy 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Mortality and outcomes after decompressive craniectomy in children with severe traumatic brain injury 93%
- Natural Progression of Routine Laboratory Markers following Spinal Trauma: A Longitudinal, Multi-Cohort Study 92%
- The Therapy Intensity Level scale for traumatic brain injury: clinimetric assessment on neuro-monitored patients across 52 European intensive care units 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Risks for death after admission to pediatric intensive care (PICU) - a comparison with the general population 94%
- Acute respiratory distress syndrome after SARS-CoV-2 infection on young adult population: international observational federated study based on electronic health records through the 4CE consortium 92%
- Population risk factors for severe disease and mortality in COVID-19: A global systematic review and meta-analysis 92%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.