SynthesisUltrasound in medicine & biology2021
Pulmonary Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound findings of lung ultrasonography in COVID-19: A systematic review.European journal of radiology · 2022Pooled it
- Pediatric lung ultrasound: Tips and tricks for better scanning and interpretation.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Make It Less Complex: Autoencoder for Speckle Noise Removal-Application to Breast and Lung Ultrasound.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- Lung Ultrasound in Predicting Outcomes in Patients with COVID-19 Treated with Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.Viruses · 2023Article
- In COVID-19 patients with mild or moderate respiratory failure, duration and type of symptoms influence the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound.European journal of internal medicine · 2022Article
- Lung ultrasound findings following COVID-19 hospitalization: A prospective longitudinal cohort study.Respiratory medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of this review was to systematize the evidence on pulmonary ultrasound (PU) use in diagnosis, monitorization or hospital discharge criteria for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Evidence on the use of PU for diagnosis and monitorization of or as hospital discharge criteria for COVID-19 patients confirmed to have COVID-19 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between December 1, 2019 and July 5, 2020 was compared with evidence obtained with thoracic radiography (TR), chest computed tomography (CT) and RT-PCR. The type of study, motives for use of PU, population, type of transducer and protocol, results of PU and quantitative or qualitative correlation with TR and/or chest CT and/or RT-PCR were evaluated. A total of 28 articles comprising 418 patients were involved. The average age was 50 y (standard deviation: 25.1 y), and there were 395 adults and 23 children. One hundred forty-three were women, 13 of whom were pregnant. The most frequent result was diffuse, coalescent and confluent B-lines. The plural line was irregular, interrupted or thickened. The presence of subpleural consolidation was noduliform, lobar or multilobar. There was good qualitative correlation between TR and chest CT and a quantitative correlation with chest CT of r = 0.65 (p < 0.001). Forty-four patients were evaluated only with PU. PU is a useful tool for diagnosis and monitorization and as criteria for hospital discharge for patients with COVID-19.
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.