ArticleBMJ open2021
Conservative and surgical modalities in the management of paediatric parapneumonic effusion and empyema: a protocol for a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionParapneumonic effusion and empyema are common complications of paediatric pneumonia. Acceptable treatment modalities for large parapneumonic effusions include antibiotics alone or in conjunction with surgical interventions. Clear guidelines on the best treatment approach are lacking and mostly based on evidence prior to widespread pneumococcal conjugate 13-valent vaccination (PCV-13). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A living systematic review and network meta-analysis will be performed comparing the five treatment modalities: (1) antibiotics alone; (2) chest tube drainage without fibrinolytics; (3) chest tube drainage with fibrinolytics; (4) video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and (5) open thoracotomy. The review protocol is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. Eligible studies are randomised controlled trials comparing any pair of interventions in paediatric patients with empyema or parapneumonic effusion. The following databases will be searched: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, LILACS and Google Scholar. Citation screening and data extraction will be completed using a validated crowdsourcing methodology using InsightScope. To assess the risk of bias, we will use the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. The primary outcome of the study is the length of stay. Secondary outcomes are (1) periprocedural complications and (2) need for re-intervention. A frequentist network meta-analysis design will be implemented with a random-effects model comparing different interventions. In a subgroup analysis, studies and patients will be stratified by the size of pleural effusion and the date of trial (pre/post-PCV-13). Eligible citations and available results will be uploaded to an online database, hosted on Open Science Framework. The database will be updated at least every 4 months with any newly published research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics review is required for this study. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Data will be available as part of an online database summarising the evidence of this living systematic review. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: Pending peer review.
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.