ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Neonatal evaluation by extended (12 area) vs. traditional (6 area) lung ultrasound scoring (NEXT-LUS): a prospective observational study.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2025. 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.
- Correlation of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound Scoring System with Clinical Score and Chest X-ray Score for Newborns with Respiratory Distress: Authors' Reply.Indian journal of pediatrics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lung ultrasound (LUS) offers a safe, repeatable, radiation-free tool in management of respiratory distress in neonates. Despite wide use, limited data exists on optimal scoring approaches. Methodology: A prospective observational study was conducted over 6 months in a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) enrolling neonates with respiratory distress within 2 h of admission after consent. LUS was performed using both 6-area and 12-area scanning approaches. Scores were assigned per Brat's criteria. Primary outcome was prediction of need for invasive ventilation within 72 h. Secondary outcomes included optimal cut-off scores, correlation with clinical outcomes and procedural safety. Results: Among 73 neonates enrolled, the 6-area LUS score (cut-off ≥5) predicted invasive mechanical ventilation within 72 h with 75% sensitivity and 67% specificity (AUC = 0.76). The 12-area score (cut-off ≥13) had similar accuracy (sensitivity 75%, specificity 73%; AUC = 0.77). Both 6-area and 12-area scores performed better in neonates <34 weeks (AUCs: 0.83 vs. 0.86). In neonates presenting after 24 h of life ( Conclusion: In neonates presenting with respiratory distress, 6-area and 12-area LUS scores done within 2 h of admission show good and comparable predictive value regarding need for invasive ventilation by 72 h.
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.