Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30477619›Full record

SynthesisZhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics2018

[Clinical efficacy of nasal high-frequency ventilation in treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome: a Meta analysis].

Yu-Lan Yang, Ben-Qing Wu, Jin-Zhen Su, Lin Yang, Gui-Chao Zhong, Lan Liu

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
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.

Yu-Lan YangDepartment of Neonatology, Second Clinical Medical College of Jinan University, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518020, China. wubenqing783@126.com.
Ben-Qing Wu
Jin-Zhen Su
Lin Yang
Gui-Chao Zhong
Lan Liu
Jinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy of nasal high-frequency ventilation (nHFV) in the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS).

methodsA literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBase (Ovid), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, Wanfang Data, and Weipu Data to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical efficacy of nHFV and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) in the treatment of NRDS. A Meta analysis was performed on the included RCTs using Rev Man 5.3 software after data extraction and quality evaluation by Cochrane 5.1.0.

resultsA total of 4 RCTs involving 218 patients were included. The Meta analysis showed that compared with the nCPAP group, the nHFV group had a significantly better treatment outcome (RR=1.73, 95%CI: 1.39-2.15, P<0.00001). There were no significant differences in the incidence rates of intraventricular hemorrhage, periventricular leukomalacia, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, pneumothorax and retinopathy of prematurity.

conclusionsCompared with nCPAP, nHFV has better clinical efficacy in the treatment of NRDS, without increasing the risk of related complications.

Indexed as

High-Frequency VentilationRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureIntermittent Positive-Pressure VentilationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID30477619
PMCPMC7389021
OpenAlexW2982111688

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.