Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24100946›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine2013

The use of the Berlin definition for acute respiratory distress syndrome during infancy and early childhood: multicenter evaluation and expert consensus.

Daniele De Luca, Marco Piastra, Giovanna Chidini, Pierre Tissieres, Edoardo Calderini, Sandrine Essouri, Alberto Medina Villanueva, Ana Vivanco Allende, Marti Pons-Odena, Luis Perez-Baena and 6 more

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter StudyConsensus Statement
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors.

Daniele De LucaPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, University Hospital "Agostino Gemelli", Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy, daniele.deluca@rm.unicatt.it.
Marco Piastra
Giovanna Chidini
Pierre Tissieres
Edoardo Calderini
Sandrine Essouri
Alberto Medina Villanueva
Ana Vivanco Allende
Marti Pons-Odena
Luis Perez-Baena
Michael Hermon
Ascanio Tridente
Giorgio Conti
Massimo Antonelli
Martin Kneyber
Respiratory Section of the European Society for Pediatric Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA new acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) definition has been recently issued: the so-called Berlin definition (BD) has some characteristics that could make it suitable for pediatrics. The European Society for Pediatric Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) Respiratory Section started a project to evaluate BD validity in early childhood. A secondary aim was reaching a consensus on clinical tools (risk factors list and illustrative radiographs) to help the application of BD.

methodsThis was an international, multicenter, retrospective study enrolling 221 children [aged greater than 30 days and less than 18 months; median age 6 (range 2-13) months], admitted to seven European pediatric intensive care units (PICU) with acute lung injury (ALI) or ARDS diagnosed with the earlier definition.

resultsPatients were categorized according to the two definitions, as follows: ALI, 36; ARDS, 185 (for the American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) definition); mild, 36; moderate, 97; severe ARDS, 88 (for BD). Mortality (13.9 % for mild ARDS; 11.3 % for moderate ARDS; 25 % for severe ARDS, p = 0.04) and the composite outcome extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)/mortality (13.9 % for mild ARDS; 11.3 % for moderate ARDS; 28.4 % for severe ARDS, p < 0.01) were different across the BD classes, whereas they were similar using the previous definition. Mortality [HR 2.7 (95 % CI 1.1-7.1)] and ECMO/mortality [HR 3 (95 % CI 1.1-7.9)] were increased only for the severe ARDS class and remained significant after adjustment for confounding factors. PICU stay was not different across severity classes, irrespective of the definition used. There was significant concordance between raters evaluating radiographs [ICC 0.6 (95 % CI 0.2-0.8)] and risk factors [ICC 0.92 (95 % CI 0.8-0.97)].

conclusionsBD validity for children is similar to that already reported in adults and mainly due to the introduction of a "severe ARDS" category. We provided clinical tools to use BD for clinical practice, research, and health services planning in pediatric critical care.

Indexed as

Acute Lung InjuryChildExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationFemaleHumansInfantIntensive Care Units, PediatricMaleRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSurvival AnalysisTerminology as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.