Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41484475›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of pediatrics2026

From "can we treat?" to "should we treat?": a narrative review on resuscitation limits at the threshold of viability.

Carlo Dani, Camilla Fazi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Carlo DaniDepartment of Neurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. carlo.dani@unifi.It.
Camilla FaziDepartment of Neurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in perinatal and neonatal care have progressively lowered the threshold of viability and improved survival among extremely preterm infants (EPIs). However, this increase in survival has not consistently been accompanied by comparable improvements in neurological outcomes, which in a relevant proportion of cases remain poor. This discrepancy generates the ethical dilemma of deciding whether to proceed with active resuscitation at the margins of viability. Historically, decisions have relied heavily on gestational age (GA), yet this single parameter has proven insufficient. PURPOSE: This narrative review examines the conceptual and practical challenges in determining the limit of active resuscitation and explores how healthcare professionals and international scientific and bioethical committees have addressed this issue, as well as how families experience and cope with it.

resultsEvidence demonstrates that multiple fetal and pregnancy-related factors significantly influence survival and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes, outperforming GA alone. Simultaneously, clinicians and families are confronted with prognostic uncertainty, psychological burdens, and cognitive biases that complicate decision-making. In this context, shared decision-making emerges not as a simple transfer of information, but as an interpretative process centered on the newborn's best interests.

conclusionNo universal gestational threshold can determine when resuscitation should or should not be initiated. Rather, the "limit" is best understood as a case-specific decision point, shaped by prognosis, parental values, ethical judgment, and clinical feasibility. Future efforts should focus not on eliminating the grey area, but on developing ethically grounded strategies for navigating it responsibly, compassionately, and with intellectual humility. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Gestational age alone is widely used to guide resuscitation decisions, but it is an imprecise and insufficient parameter. • Multiple clinical and perinatal factors significantly influence prognosis. WHAT IS NEW: • The limit of resuscitation is context-dependent, shaped by prognosis, parental values, and ethical judgment. • Shared decision-making is not just information sharing, but a collaborative process to determine the newborn's best interests.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingInfant, Extremely PrematureResuscitationResuscitation OrdersDecision Making, SharedFemaleFetal ViabilityGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyActive resuscitationGrey zoneNewbornOutcomePretermViability

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.