Trial reportPeerJ2023
Physiologic effects of surgical masking in children versus adults.
Trial report in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Child mask mandates for COVID-19: a systematic review.Archives of disease in childhood · 2024Pooled it
- Risks and benefits of face masks in children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- N95 masks increase brain blood velocity and parasympathetic outflow, yet worsen orthostatic symptoms in a healthy cohort.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- COInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- The impact of wearing facemask on COPD patients: A protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgical masks remain a focal part of the CDC guidelines to decrease COVID-19 transmission. Evidence refuting significant effects of masking on ventilation is mostly limited to small studies, with a paucity of studies on children, and none comparing children to adults. Methods: A total of 119 subjects were enrolled (71 adults, 49 children) in a prospective interventional study with each subject serving as their own mask-free control. End tidal CO2 (ETCO2), inspired CO2 (ICO2), and respiratory rate were measured by nasal cannula attached to an anesthesia machine D-fend module. Pulse oximetry and heart rate were also followed. After the mask-free period, an ASTM Level 3 disposable surgical mask was donned and 15 min of mask-worn data were collected. Results: A steady state was confirmed for ETCO2 and ICO2 over the masked period, and mean ICO2 levels rose significantly ( Discussion: The physiology of mechanical dead space is discussed, including the inverse relationship of subject age Conclusions: The wearing of a surgical mask results in a statistically significant rise in ICO2 and a smaller rise in ETCO2. Because ETCO2 and other variables remain well within normal limits, these changes are clinically insignificant.
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.