SynthesisPediatric pulmonology2026
Investigations for Bronchiolitis in Infants: An Overview of Reviews and Systematic Review of Primary Studies.
Synthesis in Pediatric pulmonology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Investigations for Bronchiolitis in Infants: An Overview of Reviews and Systematic Review of Primary Studies.Pediatric pulmonology · 2026Pooled it
- Prioritising Recommendations for Conversion to Living Mode in the Australasian Bronchiolitis Guideline: A Modified Delphi Study.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo synthesize evidence on the clinical utility of chest X-ray (CXR), laboratory and viral testing in infants with bronchiolitis, including in subgroups with unexpected deterioration or intensive care unit (ICU) admission (severe disease).
methodsAn overview of reviews and systematic review of primary studies were conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL were searched (2000 to 19/02/25) for systematic reviews and primary studies evaluating investigations in bronchiolitis management at hospital. Risk of bias (ROBIS, NOS) and certainty of evidence (GRADE) were evaluated. Results were narratively synthesized.
resultsThirty/28,602 publications were included (N = 23,605 infants, N = 59 studies; three systematic reviews [32 studies], 27 observational studies). In typical bronchiolitis: (1) CXR demonstrated insufficient diagnostic accuracy, increased antibiotic prescriptions, and was not associated with ICU length of stay (LOS) (very low quality of evidence); (2) Laboratory test results were not associated with mortality, and were inconsistent for LOS (very low quality of evidence); (3) Viral testing results were not associated with ICU admission, and were inconsistent for hospitalization (very low quality of evidence). In infants with severe disease: serum procalcitonin and c-reactive protein testing at ICU admission had some benefit in predicting bacterial co-infection and/or pneumonia (very low quality evidence). Evidence was lacking for infants with unexpected deterioration.
conclusionsVery low certainty evidence indicates that CXR, laboratory and viral testing may have limited clinical utility in individual management of typical bronchiolitis, and should not be routinely used in this group. Further research is required in subgroups with unexpected deterioration or severe disease.
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.