Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 8, 2026
Assessment and Evaluation of the High Risk Neonate: The NICU Network Neurobehavioral Scale
Published on: August 25, 2014
Multicenter neonatal databases: Trends in research uses
Liza M Creel1, Sean Gregory2,3,4, Catherine J McNeal5,6
1Department of Health Management and Systems Science, School of Public Health & Information Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, USA.
Insights
Large multicenter neonatal databases are crucial for studying premature and low birth weight (LBW) infants. Research on these vulnerable populations has expanded significantly, improving neonatology and community pediatric practices.
Area of Science:
- Neonatal research
- Perinatal health
- Pediatric outcomes
Background:
- High rates of preterm birth (12.7%) and low birth weight (LBW, 8.2%) in the US necessitate improved research and clinical practices.
- Technological advances have reduced mortality but improving overall rates of prematurity and LBW remains a priority.
- Studying preterm and LBW infants presents challenges, highlighting the need for robust data sources.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and describe three major multi-center neonatal databases.
- To assess the role of these databases in advancing research and quality improvement for preterm and LBW infants.
- To provide an overview of the landscape of research utilizing these critical resources.
Main Methods:
- A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar from 1990 to August 2014.
- Studies were included if they utilized one of the specified databases for primary data or comparison.
- Included studies were categorized by publication year, study design, and research focus.
Main Results:
- A total of 343 studies published between 1991 and 2014 were identified.
- There has been a notable increase in studies focusing on premature and LBW infants over time.
- These databases provide essential evidence supporting both neonatology and community-based pediatric practice.
Conclusions:
- The expansion of research on preterm and LBW infants is significantly supported by the availability of large, multicenter databases.
- Consistent study of clinical conditions and outcomes since 1990 indicates dedicated research agendas and resources.
- These databases facilitate long-term, replicable studies, advancing the understanding and care of vulnerable neonatal populations.
Background:
In the US, approximately 12.7% of all live births are preterm, 8.2% of live births were low birth weight (LBW), and 1.5% are very low birth weight (VLBW). Although technological advances have improved mortality rates among preterm and LBW infants, improving overall rates of prematurity and LBW remains a national priority. Monitoring short- and long-term outcomes is critical for advancing medical treatment and minimizing morbidities associated with prematurity or LBW; however, studying these infants can be challenging. Several large, multi-center neonatal databases have been developed to improve research and quality improvement of treatments for and outcomes of premature and LBW infants. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe three multi-center neonatal databases.
Methods:
We conducted a literature search using PubMed and Google Scholar over the period 1990 to August 2014. Studies were included in our review if one of the databases was used as a primary source of data or comparison. Included studies were categorized by year of publication; study design employed, and research focus.
Results:
A total of 343 studies published between 1991 and 2014 were included. Studies of premature and LBW infants using these databases have increased over time, and provide evidence for both neonatology and community-based pediatric practice.
Conclusions:
Research into treatment and outcomes of premature and LBW infants is expanding, partially due to the availability of large, multicenter databases. The consistency of clinical conditions and neonatal outcomes studied since 1990 demonstrates that there are dedicated research agendas and resources that allow for long-term, and potentially replicable, studies within this population.
