ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022
Teaching fiberoptic-assisted tracheoscopy in very low birth weight infants: A randomized controlled simulator study.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Advancing arrhythmia education through the CDIO approach: a new paradigm in nursing student training.BMC nursing · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We developed a fiberoptic-assisted tracheoscopy (FAST) method to avoid direct laryngoscopy during surfactant replacement therapy and compared two training approaches on a very low birth weight (VLBW) infant simulator. Design: This prospective randomized controlled study was conducted at the Department of Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care Medicine of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Participants: We recruited physicians, trainees, students, and nurses without prior experience in endoscopic techniques. Interventions: Participants were assigned randomly to a group that received instructions according to Peyton's Four-Step Approach and a control group that received standard bedside teaching only. Main outcome measures: Primary endpoints were the total and the component times required to place the bronchoscope and the method success. Results: We recruited 186 participants. Compared with the control group, the Peyton group had a lower mean (±standard deviation) FAST completion time (33.2 ± 27.5 s vs. 79.5 ± 47.9 s, Conclusion: After standardized training, the vast majority of novices completed FAST successfully. Peyton's four-step approach resulted in faster and more successful performance than standardized training.
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.