ArticleJournal of medical ultrasound
Diagnosing Pulmonary Embolism When the Clinical Picture Is Not Clear - The Role of the Point-of-care Ultrasound.
Article in Journal of medical ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pulmonary embolism consensus.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has become a reliable and powerful tool working as a complement to the traditional physical examination. It has proven to be a reliable and reproducible method to a quicker and safer diagnosis, sometimes surpassing the diagnostic accuracy of more traditional techniques. We present two cases of pulmonary embolism (PE) with clinical presentations that suggested other diagnoses, prior to the performance of POCUS: a 60-year-old patient with nausea and vomiting and a 66-year-old female with a week-long progressive increase of shortness of breath and increased peripheral edema. In the reported cases, we aim to pinpoint the importance and usefulness of POCUS in the everyday evaluation of our patients, in multiple settings and by multiple specialty physicians, supported by its robust evidence-based background. It has proven to be a useful tool in evaluating in a fast and nonharmful way complementing more traditional techniques, which proves to be especially important regarding cases, like the ones we describe, when the correct diagnosis is not always clear to presentation. The use of multiorgan POCUS allows even in the most atypical presentations, the rise of suspicion of PE, leading to the necessary steps to a final diagnosis and management.
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.