***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: Nineteen studies enrolling approximately 5000 preterm and/or LBW infants met inclusion criteria. No new trials were identified in May 2013. When all studies were combined, a significant reduction in sepsis was noted (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.98; typical risk difference (RD) -0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to -0.05; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 33, 95% CI 20 to infinity), and moderate between-study heterogeneity was reported (I2 54% for RR, 55% for RD). A significant reduction of one or more episodes was found for any serious infection when all studies were combined (typical RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.92; typical RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.02 to -0.06; NNTB 25, 95% CI 17 to 50), and moderate between-study heterogeneity was observed (I2 50% for RR, 62% for RD). No statistically significant differences in mortality from all causes were noted (typical RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.05; typical RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01), and no heterogeneity for RR (I2 = 21%) or low heterogeneity for RD was documented (I2 = 28%). No statistically significant difference was seen in mortality from infection; in incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) or intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) or in length of hospital stay. No major adverse effects of IVIG were reported in any of these studies. IVIG administration results in a 3% reduction in sepsis and a 4% reduction in one or more episodes of any serious infection but is not associated with reductions in other clinically important outcomes, including mortality. Prophylactic use of IVIG is not associated with any short-term serious side effects. The decision to use prophylactic IVIG will depend on the costs and the values assigned to the clinical outcomes. There is no justification for conducting additional RCTs to test the efficacy of previously studied IVIG preparations in reducing nosocomial infections in preterm and/or LBW infants.
Output:

To date, approximately 5000 infants have been enrolled in studies conducted to evaluate the effects of prophylactic use of intravenous immunoglobulin on neonatal outcomes. Intravenous administration of immunoglobulin results in a 3% reduction in blood-borne infection and a 4% reduction in serious infection. Intravenous administration of immunoglobulin is not associated with reductions in other important neonatal outcomes or in length of hospital stay. Most important, intravenous immunoglobulin administration does not have any important effect on mortality. Prophylactic use of IVIG is not associated with any short-term serious side effects. From a clinical perspective, a 3% to 4% reduction in nosocomial infection without a reduction in mortality or other important clinical outcomes is of marginal importance.