Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Methodological flaws in a meta-analysis compromise the integrity of the evidence

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Sivakumar G, Kuppusamy P, P LP, Mishra A, Sivakumar S. Effectiveness of oral dextrose gel for neonates at risk of hypoglycemia: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and GRADE assessment of randomized controlled trials. J Perinatol. 2025;45:1335–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hegarty JE, Harding JE, Gamble GD, Crowther CA, Edlin R, Alsweiler JM. Prophylactic oral dextrose gel for newborn babies at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia: a randomised controlled dose-finding trial (the pre-hPOD study). PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002155.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Harding JE, Hegarty JE, Crowther CA, Edlin RP, Gamble GD, Alsweiler JM, et al. Evaluation of oral dextrose gel for prevention of neonatal hypoglycemia (hPOD): a multicenter, double-blind randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2021;18:e1003411.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Coors SM, Cousin JJ, Hagan JL, Kaiser JR. Prophylactic dextrose gel does not prevent neonatal hypoglycemia: a quasi-experimental pilot study. J Pediatr. 2018;198:156–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Troughton K, Corrigan N, Tait R. Hypostop gel in the treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Dis Childhood. 2000;Suppl1:A30.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

KP: conceptualized the correspondence, drafted and critically revised the manuscript; AR: provided methodological input and contributed to the literature review and synthesis; JK: conceptualized the correspondence, reviewed for accuracy, supervised revisions, and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirti Pai.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pai, K., Raghav, A. & Kumar, J. Methodological flaws in a meta-analysis compromise the integrity of the evidence. J Perinatol (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-025-02524-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-025-02524-6

Search

Quick links