ArticleCritical care science2024
Evaluation of the classifications of severity in acute respiratory distress syndrome in childhood by the Berlin Consensus and the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference.
Article in Critical care science, 2024. 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.
- Waiting for the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference 3.Critical care science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare two methods for defining and classifying the severity of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: the Berlin classification, which uses the relationship between the partial pressure of oxygen and the fraction of inspired oxygen, and the classification of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference, which uses the oxygenation index.
methodsThis was a prospective study of patients aged 0 - 18 years with a diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome who were invasively mechanically ventilated and provided one to three arterial blood gas samples, totaling 140 valid measurements. These measures were evaluated for correlation using the Spearman test and agreement using the kappa coefficient between the two classifications, initially using the general population of the study and then subdividing it into patients with and without bronchospasm and those with and without the use of neuromuscular blockers. The effect of these two factors (bronchospasm and neuromuscular blocking agent) separately and together on both classifications was also assessed using two-way analysis of variance.
resultsIn the general population, who were 54 patients aged 0 - 18 years a strong negative correlation was found by Spearman's test (ρ -0.91; p < 0.001), and strong agreement was found by the kappa coefficient (0.62; p < 0.001) in the comparison between Berlin and Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference. In the populations with and without bronchospasm and who did and did not use neuromuscular blockers, the correlation coefficients were similar to those of the general population, though among patients not using neuromuscular blockers, there was greater agreement between the classifications than for patients using neuromuscular blockers (kappa 0.67 versus 0.56, p < 0.001 for both). Neuromuscular blockers had a significant effect on the relationship between the partial pressure of oxygen and the fraction of inspired oxygen (analysis of variance; F: 12.9; p < 0.001) and the oxygenation index (analysis of variance; F: 8.3; p = 0.004).
conclusionThere was a strong correlation and agreement between the two classifications in the general population and in the subgroups studied. Use of neuromuscular blockers had a significant effect on the severity of acute respiratory distress syndrome.
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.