ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Lung Ultrasound Findings in Healthy Children and in Those Who Had Recent, Not Severe COVID-19 Infection.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- COVID-19 Pediatric Follow-Up: Respiratory Long COVID-Associated Comorbidities and Lung Ultrasound Alterations in a Cohort of Italian Children.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Qualitative and semi-quantitative ultrasound assessment in delta and Omicron Covid-19 patients: data from high volume reference center.Infectious agents and cancer · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lung ultrasound (LUS) is gaining consensus as a non-invasive diagnostic imaging method for the evaluation of pulmonary disease in children. Aim: To clarify what type of artifacts (e.g., B-lines, pleural irregularity) can be defined normal LUS findings in children and to evaluate the differences in children who did not experience COVID-19 and in those with recent, not severe, previous COVID-19. Methods: LUS was performed according to standardized protocols. Different patterns of normality were defined: pattern 1: no plural irregularity and no B-lines; pattern 2: only mild basal posterior plural irregularity and no B-lines; pattern 3: mild posterior basal/para-spine/apical pleural irregularity and no B-lines; pattern 4: like pattern 3 plus rare B-lines; pattern 5: mild, diffuse short subpleural vertical artifacts and rare B-lines; pattern 6: mild, diffuse short subpleural vertical artifacts and limited B-lines; pattern 7: like pattern 6 plus minimal subpleural atelectasis. Coalescent B-lines, consolidations, or effusion were considered pathological. Results: Overall, 459 healthy children were prospectively recruited (mean age 10.564 ± 3.839 years). Children were divided into two groups: group 1 (n = 336), those who had not had COVID-19 infection, and group 2 (n = 123), those who experienced COVID-19 infection. Children with previous COVID-19 had higher values of LUS score than those who had not (p = 0.0002). Children with asymptomatic COVID-19 had similar LUS score as those who did not have infections (p > 0.05), while those who had symptoms showed higher LUS score than those who had not shown symptoms (p = 0.0228). Conclusions: We report the pattern of normality for LUS examination in children. We also showed that otherwise healthy children who recovered from COVID-19 and even those who were mildly symptomatic had more “physiological” artifacts at LUS examinations.
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.