SynthesisJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2016
Accuracy and precision of minimally-invasive cardiac output monitoring in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy and precision of non-invasive cardiac output monitoring by electrical cardiometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020Pooled it
- Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 versus crystalloid co-loading during general anesthesia induction: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of anesthesia · 2017Trial
- Development and internal validation of a deep learning algorithm for intraoperative arterial pressure-based stroke volume index estimation in children: a single-center retrospective study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Management of arterial hypotension in critically Ill children: a narrative review and practical approach.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Non-Invasive Cardiac Output Monitoring with Electrical Cardiometry During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery, a Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Neonatal reference values and nomograms of systemic vascular resistances estimated with electrical cardiometry.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the agreement and reliability of Transpalpebral Tonometers compared with Goldmann Applanation Tonometer - A systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Estimated continuous cardiac output based on pulse wave transit time in critically ill children: a report of two cases.Critical care science · 2023Article
- Detection of a Stroke Volume Decrease by Machine-Learning Algorithms Based on Thoracic Bioimpedance in Experimental Hypovolaemia.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- [Hemodynamic monitoring in pediatric anesthesia].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022Review
- Non-invasive electrical cardiometry cardiac output monitoring during prehospital helicopter emergency medical care: a feasibility study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022Article
- Carotid Doppler Ultrasonography for Hemodynamic Assessment in Critically Ill Children.Pediatric cardiology · 2022Article
- Dynamic parameters for fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children: A systematic review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
- Electrocardiometry for Hemodynamic Categorization and Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness in Pediatric Septic Shock: A Pilot Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021Article
- Electrocardiometry Fluid Responsiveness in Pediatric Septic Shock.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021Article
- Cerebral Oximetry in Preterm Infants-To Use or Not to Use, That Is the Question.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Article
- Recommendations for hemodynamic monitoring for critically ill children-expert consensus statement issued by the cardiovascular dynamics section of the European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC).Critical care (London, England) · 2020Article
- Perioperative non-invasive versus semi-invasive cardiac index monitoring in patients with bariatric surgery - a prospective observational study.BMC anesthesiology · 2020Observational
- Indirect Calorimetry Overestimates Oxygen Consumption in Young Children: Caution is Advised Using Direct Fick Method as a Reference Method in Cardiac Output Comparison Studies.Pediatric cardiology · 2020Observational
- Non-invasive Cardiac Output Monitoring in Neonates.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several minimally-invasive technologies are available for cardiac output (CO) measurement in children, but the accuracy and precision of these devices have not yet been evaluated in a systematic review and meta-analysis. We conducted a comprehensive search of the medical literature in PubMed, Cochrane Library of Clinical Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science from its inception to June 2014 assessing the accuracy and precision of all minimally-invasive CO monitoring systems used in children when compared with CO monitoring reference methods. Pooled mean bias, standard deviation, and mean percentage error of included studies were calculated using a random-effects model. The inter-study heterogeneity was also assessed using an I(2) statistic. A total of 20 studies (624 patients) were included. The overall random-effects pooled bias, and mean percentage error were 0.13 ± 0.44 l min(-1) and 29.1 %, respectively. Significant inter-study heterogeneity was detected (P < 0.0001, I(2) = 98.3 %). In the sub-analysis regarding the device, electrical cardiometry showed the smallest bias (-0.03 l min(-1)) and lowest percentage error (23.6 %). Significant residual heterogeneity remained after conducting sensitivity and subgroup analyses based on the various study characteristics. By meta-regression analysis, we found no independent effects of study characteristics on weighted mean difference between reference and tested methods. Although the pooled bias was small, the mean pooled percentage error was in the gray zone of clinical applicability. In the sub-group analysis, electrical cardiometry was the device that provided the most accurate measurement. However, a high heterogeneity between studies was found, likely due to a wide range of study characteristics.
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.