ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Pocket-sized hand-held ultrasound for evaluating pediatric functional constipation by both novice and expert clinicians.
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.
- Usefulness of ultrasound in diagnosing constipation in children: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Pediatric functional constipation (PFC) is a global health concern. This study evaluates the utility of pocket-sized ultrasound (PsUS) as a tool for assessing PFC among clinicians with varying levels of ultrasound (US) experience. We assessed the validity of PsUS in measuring transverse rectal diameter (TRD) and rectal anterior wall thickness (RAWT) compared to conventional US and to evaluate agreement between expert and novice clinicians. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, TRD and RAWT were measured using conventional US and PsUS in 52 children (PFC: Results: High agreement was found between the experienced and novice clinicians in assessing PFC using conventional US (ICC for TRD = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.98-0.99; ICC for RAWT = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97-0.99) and PsUS (ICC for TRD = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97-0.99; ICC for RAWT = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.96-0.98). PsUS showed robust validity compared to conventional US (ICCs of 0.96 for TRD and 0.87 for RAWT). ROC analysis showed high diagnostic accuracy for PsUS at TRD [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.88, cut-off 30.25 mm] and RAWT (AUC = 0.91, cut-off 2.05 mm). Conclusions: These results suggest PsUS is a valid and reliable tool for assessing PFC, that can be used by clinicians with varying levels of US experience.
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.