ReviewInternal and emergency medicine2023
Acute dyspnea in the emergency department: a clinical review.
Review in Internal and emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of biomarkers across the care continuum in acute heart failure.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- Accuracy of Respiratory Distress Observational Scale (RDOS) in the emergency department.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic agreement between prehospital and in-hospital diagnoses for dyspnea: a retrospective study in a French prehospital emergency medical service.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Vertical Displacement Index and Early Treatment-Related Physiological Improvement in Acute Respiratory Failure: An Exploratory Ultrasound-Based Study.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2026Observational
- AWaRe antibiotic prescribing for common acute infections in private primary care in low-middle-income countries: a patient-level analysis using IQVIA prescriber surveys from Pakistan, Egypt and Indonesia.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Impact of Prehospital Lung Ultrasound on Diagnostic Precision and Hospital Transport in Patients with Dyspnea and Respiratory Failure: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- AI enhancing differential diagnosis of acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute heart failure.iScience · 2026Article
- Article
- Application of a Nursing Quality Improvement Checklist in the Emergency Treatment of Trauma Patients.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Predictive values of news and Mts in patients presenting with dyspnea: A comparative cohort study.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of SpO2/RR Ratio for Short-Term Intubation and Mortality Risks in Pre-ED Patients With Acute Dyspnea Without Oxygen Therapy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Inter-rater agreement of respiratory distress observation scale measurement between physicians and nurses in the emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Lung Ultrasound Offers Fast and Reliable Exclusion of Heart Failure in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Diagnostic Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- "It's about maintaining a calm and reassuring presence": a qualitative study about ambulance clinicians' experiences of caring for patients with breathlessness.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Performance of an ultrasound diagnostic algorithm for acute dyspneic patients in the emergency department: an EMERALD-US protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Lung Ultrasound Performed by Non-Expert Staff in Patients with Acute Dyspnea.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Point-of-care lung ultrasound - a rapid and reliable diagnostic tool for emergency physicians treating patients with acute dyspnea in high-volume emergency departments.Emergency radiology · 2025Observational
- TeLePhone Respiratory (TeLePoR) score to assess the risk of immediate respiratory support through phone call for acute dyspnoea: a prospective cohort study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute dyspnea represents one of the most frequent symptoms leading to emergency room evaluation. Its significant prognostic value warrants a careful evaluation. The differential diagnosis of dyspnea is complex due to the lack of specificity and the loose association between its intensity and the severity of the underlying pathological condition. The initial assessment of dyspnea calls for prompt diagnostic evaluation and identification of optimal monitoring strategy and provides information useful to allocate the patient to the most appropriate setting of care. In recent years, accumulating evidence indicated that lung ultrasound, along with echocardiography, represents the first rapid and non-invasive line of assessment that accurately differentiates heart, lung or extra-pulmonary involvement in patients with dyspnea. Moreover, non-invasive respiratory support modalities such as high-flow nasal oxygen and continuous positive airway pressure have aroused major clinical interest, in light of their efficacy and practicality to treat patients with dyspnea requiring ventilatory support, without using invasive mechanical ventilation. This clinical review is focused on the pathophysiology of acute dyspnea, on its clinical presentation and evaluation, including ultrasound-based diagnostic workup, and on available non-invasive modalities of respiratory support that may be required in patients with acute dyspnea secondary or associated with respiratory failure.
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.