ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021
Lung Ultrasound in Patients With Dyspnea From Infective Lung Disease.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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, 1 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infective lung disease is a spectrum of pulmonary disorders with high prevalence in clinical practice. In the last decade, many studies focused on the clinical usefulness of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the management of patients presenting with dyspnea from infective lung disease. We report data on the methodological and standardized use of bedside LUS in the differential diagnosis of patients with acute dyspnea from infective lung diseases. We performed a cross-sectional study in 439 patients (160 women and 279 men, mean age 64.2 ± 11.5 years, age range 23-91 years) with infective lung diseases. A bedside LUS with a convex probe and chest X-ray were performed in all subjects. Chest CT was performed in a subgroup of patients, as clinically needed. We observed a statistically significant difference in the percentage of pleural effusion and pulmonary consolidation assessed by LUS, compared to X-ray (52.7 vs. 20%, respectively,
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.