SynthesisCanadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR2024
Point-of-care lung ultrasound in detecting pneumonia: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a machine learning-driven framework for differentiating pediatric bronchopneumonia from lobar pneumonia: a multicenter investigation.European journal of medical research · 2025Trial
- Article
- Exploratory Assessment of Pulsed-Wave Doppler Representations of Lung Sounds Using Deep Learning: An In-Vitro Phantom Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of lung ultrasound and procalcitonin in differentiating early neonatal pneumonia from transient tachypnea of the newborn.BMC pediatrics · 2026Observational
- Article
- Point-of-care ultrasound for evaluating acute dyspnoea in emergency departments: Systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Article
- My approach to respiratory sepsis: pulmonary.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2026Review
- Lung ultrasound vs chest radiography for pneumonia diagnosis in critically ill patients in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and Bayesian network diagnostic meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- An international standardization to study the clinical use of lung ultrasound to discriminate viral, bacterial and atypical pneumonia in children with community acquired pneumonia.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Article
- Lung ultrasound as a diagnostic tool for pulmonary consolidation and atelectasis after cardiac surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Limited evidence exists to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) across all age groups. This review aimed to investigate the benefits of point-of-care LUS for the early diagnosis of pneumonia compared to traditional chest X-rays (CXR) in a subgroup analysis including pediatric, adult, and geriatric populations. Material and Methods: This systematic review examined systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and original research from 2017 to 2021, comparing point-of-care LUS and CXR in diagnosing pneumonia among adults, pediatrics and geriatrics. Studies lacking direct comparison or exploring diseases other than pneumonia, case reports, and those examining pneumonia secondary to COVID-19 variants were excluded. The search utilized PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases with specific search strings. The study selection, conducted by two independent investigators, demonstrated an agreement by the Kappa index, ensuring reliable article selection. The QUADAS-2 tool assessed the selected studies for quality, highlighting risk of bias and applicability concerns across key domains. Statistical analysis using Stata Version 16 determined pooled sensitivity and specificity via a bivariate model, emphasizing LUS and CXR diagnostic capabilities. Additionally, RevMan 5.4.1 facilitated the calculation of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), offering insights into diagnostic accuracy. Results: The search, conducted across PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases by two independent investigators, initially identified 1045 articles. Following screening processes, 12 studies comprised a sample size of 2897. LUS demonstrated a likelihood ratio of 5.09, a specificity of 81.91%, and a sensitivity of 92.13% in detecting pneumonia in pediatric, adult, and geriatric patients, with a p-value of 0.0002 and a 95% confidence interval, indicating diagnostic accuracy ranging from 84.07% to 96.29% when compared directly to CXR. Conclusion: Our review supports that LUS can play a valuable role in detecting pneumonia early with high sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy across diverse patient demographics, including pediatric, adult, and geriatric populations. Since it overcomes most of the limitations of CXR and other diagnostic modalities, it can be utilized as a diagnostic tool for pneumonia for all age groups as it is a safe, readily available, and cost-effective modality that can be utilized in an emergency department, intensive care units, wards, and clinics by trained respiratory care professionals.
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.