ReviewJournal of clinical neonatology2013
Non-invasive Ventilation in Premature Infants: Based on Evidence or Habit.
Review in Journal of clinical neonatology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines for the use of lung ultrasound to optimise the management of neonatal respiratory distress: international expert consensus.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Non-Invasive Ventilation with Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) Improves Extubation Outcomes in Extremely Low-Birth-Weight Infants.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The effect of changing respiratory rate settings on COJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023Article
- Aerosol drug delivery to spontaneously-breathing preterm neonates: lessons learned.Respiratory research · 2021Review
- Incidence and Severity of Nasal Injuries in Preterm Infants Associated to Non-Invasive Ventilation Using Short Binasal Prong.Global pediatric health · 2021Article
- Caffeine versus aminophylline in combination with oxygen therapy for apnea of prematurity: A retrospective cohort study.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- A composite neonatal adverse outcome indicator using population-based data: an update.International journal of population data science · 2020Article
- [Clinical effect of bubble nasal continuous positive airway pressure versus conventional nasal continuous positive airway pressure in respiratory support for preterm infants with neonatal respiratory distress syndrome].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite surfactant and mechanical ventilation being the standard of care for preterm infants with respiratory failure, non-invasive respiratory support is increasingly being employed in neonatal units. The latter can be accomplished in a variety of ways but none of them have been proven so far to be superior to intubation and mechanical ventilation. Nonetheless, they appear to be safe and effective in experienced hands. This article relates to the use of non-invasive forms of respiratory support and evidence is reviewed from the clinical trials which have evaluated the use of these techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.