Observational studyMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2019
Comparison of Laryngoscopic Views betweenC-MAC™ and Conventional Laryngoscopy in Patients with Multiple Preoperative Prognostic Criteria of Difficult Intubation. An Observational Cross-Sectional Study.
Observational study in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Airway Management: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Cureus · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Difficult Airways: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Incidence and diagnostic validity of difficult airway in emergency departments in China: a cross-sectional survey.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Video screen visualization patterns when using a video laryngoscope for tracheal intubation: A systematic review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Review
- Creation of an artificial intelligence model for intubation difficulty classification by deep learning (convolutional neural network) using face images: an observational study.Journal of intensive care · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.