Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28091776›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2017

Nasal masks or binasal prongs for delivering continuous positive airway pressure in preterm neonates-a randomised trial.

Aparna Chandrasekaran, Anu Thukral, M Jeeva Sankar, Ramesh Agarwal, Vinod K Paul, Ashok K Deorari

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Incidence of nasal pressure injury in preterm infants on nasal mask noninvasive ventilation.Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2023
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aparna ChandrasekaranNewborn Health Knowledge Centre, ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Anu ThukralNewborn Health Knowledge Centre, ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
M Jeeva SankarNewborn Health Knowledge Centre, ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Ramesh AgarwalNewborn Health Knowledge Centre, ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Vinod K PaulNewborn Health Knowledge Centre, ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Ashok K DeorariNewborn Health Knowledge Centre, ICMR Center for Advanced Research in Newborn Health, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India. ashokdeorari_56@hotmail.com.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) delivered using nasal masks with binasal prongs. We randomly allocated 72 neonates between 26 and 32 weeks gestation to receive bubble CPAP by either nasal mask (n = 37) or short binasal prongs (n = 35). Primary outcome was mean FiO

conclusionsNasal masks appear to be as efficacious as binasal prongs in providing CPAP. Masks are associated with lower risk of severe nasal trauma.

trial registrationCTRI2012/08/002868 What is Known? • Binasal prongs are better than single nasal and nasopharyngeal prongs for delivering continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in preventing need for re-intubation. • It is unclear if they are superior to newer generation nasal masks in preterm neonates requiring CPAP. What is New? • Oxygen requirement during the first 24 h of CPAP delivery is comparable with use of nasal masks and binasal prongs. • Use of nasal masks is, however, associated with significantly lower risk of severe grades of nasal injury.

Indexed as

MasksChi-Square DistributionContinuous Positive Airway PressureFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureIntention to Treat AnalysisMaleNasal CavityRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornContinuous positive airway pressureNasalPretermRandomised trial

Identifiers

PMID28091776
OpenAlexW2572103979

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.