ArticleRespiratory research2021
Comparison of airway pressures and expired gas washout for nasal high flow versus CPAP in child airway replicas.
Article in Respiratory research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-flow nasal cannula therapy in pediatric care: A regional practice survey from KSA.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Physical and Physiological Mechanisms of Emergent Hydrodynamic Pressure in High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2025Review
- An update on diagnosis and management of obstructive sleep apnoea in the first 2 years of life.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Review
- Nasal pillow noninvasive ventilation versus high-flow nasal therapy after extubation in surgical intensive care patients: A propensity-matched cohort study.The Journal of international medical research · 2022Article
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy: Physiological Mechanisms and Clinical Applications in Children.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor children and adults, the standard treatment for obstructive sleep apnea is the delivery of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Though effective, CPAP masks can be uncomfortable to patients, contributing to adherence concerns. Recently, nasal high flow (NHF) therapy has been investigated as an alternative, especially in CPAP-intolerant children. The present study aimed to compare and contrast the positive airway pressures and expired gas washout generated by NHF versus CPAP in child nasal airway replicas.
methodsNHF therapy was investigated at a flow rate of 20 L/min and compared to CPAP at 5 cmH
resultsNHF therapy generated an average positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5.17 ± 2.09 cmH
conclusionIn child airway replicas, NHF at 20 L/min generated average PEEP similar to CPAP at 5 cm H
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.