Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28610670›Full record

ArticleRespiratory medicine2017

Lung ultrasound as a diagnostic tool for radiographically-confirmed pneumonia in low resource settings.

Laura E Ellington, Robert H Gilman, Miguel A Chavez, Farhan Pervaiz, Julio Marin-Concha, Patricia Compen-Chang, Stefan Riedel, Shalim J Rodriguez, Charlotte Gaydos, Justin Hardick and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Respiratory medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Point-of-care lung ultrasound in detecting pneumonia: A systematic review.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

17 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Laura E EllingtonDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Robert H GilmanProgram in Global Disease Epidemiology and Control, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA; Biomedical Research Unit, Asociación Benéfica PRISMA, Lima, Peru.
Miguel A ChavezDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA; Biomedical Research Unit, Asociación Benéfica PRISMA, Lima, Peru.
Farhan PervaizDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Julio Marin-ConchaBiomedical Research Unit, Asociación Benéfica PRISMA, Lima, Peru.
Patricia Compen-ChangInstituto Nacional de Salud del Niño, Lima, Peru.
Stefan RiedelDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Shalim J RodriguezUnidad de Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital Nacional Eduardo Rebagliati Martins, Lima, Peru.
Charlotte GaydosDivision of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Justin HardickDivision of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
James M TielschDepartment of Global Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington D.C., USA.
Mark SteinhoffGlobal Health Center, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, USA.
Jane BensonDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Evelyn A MayDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Dante Figueroa-QuintanillaInstituto Nacional de Salud del Niño, Lima, Peru.
William CheckleyDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA; Program in Global Disease Epidemiology and Control, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA. Electronic address: wcheckl1@jhmi.edu.
Lung Ultrasound for Pneumonia Assessment (LUPA) Study Investigators
Johns Hopkins University · USInstituto Nacional de Salud del Niño · PECincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USHospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia · PEMilken Institute · USPrisma · PE

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K007467/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPneumonia is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children worldwide; however, its diagnosis can be challenging, especially in settings where skilled clinicians or standard imaging are unavailable. We sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound when compared to radiographically-confirmed clinical pediatric pneumonia.

methodsBetween January 2012 and September 2013, we consecutively enrolled children aged 2-59 months with primary respiratory complaints at the outpatient clinics, emergency department, and inpatient wards of the Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño in Lima, Peru. All participants underwent clinical evaluation by a pediatrician and lung ultrasonography by one of three general practitioners. We also consecutively enrolled children without respiratory symptoms. Children with respiratory symptoms had a chest radiograph. We obtained ancillary laboratory testing in a subset.

resultsFinal clinical diagnoses included 453 children with pneumonia, 133 with asthma, 103 with bronchiolitis, and 143 with upper respiratory infections. In total, CXR confirmed the diagnosis in 191 (42%) of 453 children with clinical pneumonia. A consolidation on lung ultrasound, which is our primary endpoint for pneumonia, had a sensitivity of 88.5%, specificity of 100%, and an area under-the-curve of 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.97) when compared to radiographically-confirmed clinical pneumonia. When any abnormality on lung ultrasound was compared to radiographically-confirmed clinical pneumonia the sensitivity increased to 92.2% and the specificity decreased to 95.2%, with an area under-the-curve of 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.96).

conclusionsLung ultrasound had high diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of radiographically-confirmed pneumonia. Added benefits of lung ultrasound include rapid testing and high inter-rater agreement. Lung ultrasound may serve as an alternative tool for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia.

Indexed as

AsthmaBronchiolitisChild, PreschoolEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHealth ResourcesHumansInfantLungMalePeruPneumoniaPoint-of-Care TestingRadiographyRespiratory Tract InfectionsUltrasonographyLung ultrasoundPediatric pneumoniaPoint-of-care diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID28610670
PMCPMC5480773
OpenAlexW2616727812

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.