Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2018
Lung real time three-dimensional imaging in critically ill ventilated patients: a global diagnosis concordance study.
Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2018-2019 end of year summary: respiration.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung ultrasound (LUS) increases clinical diagnosis performance in intensive care unit (ICU). Real-time three-dimensional (3-D) imaging was compared with two-dimensional (2-D) LUS by assessing the global diagnosis concordance. In this single center, prospective, observational, pilot study, one trained operator performed a 3-D LUS immediately after a 2-D LUS in eight areas of interest on the same areas in 16 ventilated critically ill patients. All cine loops were recorded on a computer without visible link between 2-D and 3-D exams. Two experts blindly reviewed cine loops. Four main diagnoses were proposed: normal lung, consolidation, pleural effusion and interstitial syndrome. Fleiss κ and Cohen's κ values were calculated. In 252 LUS cine loops, the concordance between 2-D and 3-D exams was 83.3% (105/126), 77.6% (99/126) and 80.2% (101/126) for the trained operator and the experts respectively. The Cohen's κ coefficient value was 0.69 [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.58-0.80] for expert 1 meaning a substantial agreement. The inter-rater reliability was very good (Fleiss' κ value = 0.94 [95% CI 0.87-1.0]) for 3-D exams. The Cohen's κ was excellent for pleural effusion (κ= 0.93 [95% CI 0.76-1.0]), substantial for normal lung diagnosis (κ = 0.68 [95% CI 0.51-0.86]) and interstitial syndrome (κ = 0.62 [95% CI 0.45-0.80]) and fair for consolidation diagnoses (κ = 0.47 [95% CI 0.30-0.64]). In ICU ventilated patients, there was a substantial concordance between 2-D and 3-D LUS with a good inter-rater reliability. However, the diagnosis concordance for lung consolidation is poor.
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.