Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29951209›Full record

ReviewMaternal health, neonatology and perinatology2018

Air displacement plethysmography (pea pod) in full-term and pre-term infants: a comprehensive review of accuracy, reproducibility, and practical challenges.

Hajar Mazahery, Pamela R von Hurst, Christopher J D McKinlay, Barbara E Cormack, Cathryn A Conlon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Hajar Mazahery1College of Health, Massey University, Auckland, 0745 New Zealand.
Pamela R von Hurst1College of Health, Massey University, Auckland, 0745 New Zealand.
Christopher J D McKinlayKidz First Neonatal Care, Counties Manukau Health, Auckland, New Zealand.
Barbara E CormackStarship Children's Hospital, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand.
Cathryn A Conlon1College of Health, Massey University, Auckland, 0745 New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Air displacement plethysmography (ADP) has been widely utilised to track body composition because it is considered to be practical, reliable, and valid. Pea Pod is the infant version of ADP that accommodates infants up to the age of 6 months and has been widely utilised to assess the body composition of full-term infants, and more recently pre-term infants. The primary goal of this comprehensive review is to 1) discuss the accuracy/reproducibility of Pea Pod in both full- and pre-term infants, 2) highlight and discuss practical challenges and potential sources of measurement errors in relation to Pea Pod operating principles, and 3) make suggestions for future research direction to overcome the identified limitations.

Indexed as

ADPAir displacement plethysmographyBody compositionFull-termInfantPea podPre-term

Identifiers

PMID29951209
PMCPMC6011189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.