ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Thoracic UltrasONOgraphy Reporting: The TUONO Study.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- ESICM-ESPNIC international expert consensus on quantitative lung ultrasound in intensive care.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
- Role of Lung Ultrasound in the Detection of Lung Sequelae in Post-COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The Role of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in the Differential Diagnosis of Malignant and Benign Subpleural Lung Lesions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Thoracic UltrasONOgraphy Reporting: The TUONO Consensus.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a validated technique for the prompt diagnosis and bedside monitoring of critically ill patients due to its availability, safety profile, and cost-effectiveness. The aim of this work is to detect similarities and differences among LUS reports performed in ICUs and to provide a common ground for an integrated report form. We collected all LUS reports during an index week in 21 ICUs from the GiViTI network. First, we considered signs, chest areas, and terminology reported. Then, we compared different report structures and categorized them as structured reports (SRs), provided with a predefined model form, and free unstructured text reports (FTRs) that had no predetermined structure. We analyzed 171 reports from 21 ICUs, and 59 reports from 5 ICUs were structured. All the reports presented a qualitative description that mainly focused on the presence of B-lines, consolidations, and pleural effusion. Zones were defined in 66 reports (39%). In SRs, a complete examination of all the regions was more frequently achieved (96% vs. 74%), and a higher impact on therapeutic strategies was observed (17% vs. 6%). LUS reports vary significantly among different centers. Adopting an integrated SR seems to promote a systematic approach in scanning and reporting, with a potential impact on LUS clinical applications.
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.