ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Predictive role of lung ultrasound score for mortality risk of patients with severe pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The association of lung ultrasound score (LUS) with mortality risk in severe pneumonia patients remains unclear now. This study aimed to identify the predictive role of LUS for the risk of mortality among patients with severe pneumonia. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science (WOS) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched up to November 13, 2025. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined to assess the association between LUS and mortality risk of severe pneumonia patients, which was performed by STATA 17.0 software. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic ORs (DORs), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) and false positive rate (FPR) were estimated to clarify the diagnostic performance of LUS using the Meta-DiSc 2.0 tool. Results: Thirteen studies with 962 cases were included, with the mortality rate of 35.02% (337/962). Pooled results demonstrated that elevated LUS was significantly related to increased risk of mortality among severe pneumonia patients (OR =1.79, 95% CI: 1.23-2.61, P=0.003), which was further identified by subgroup analyses based on the country, study design and pathogen clarification. After combining the 11 diagnostic studies, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 84% (95% CI: 0.77-0.89) and 78% (95% CI: 0.72-0.83), with the LR+, LR- and FPR of 3.78 (95% CI: 3.04-4.72), 0.21 (95% CI: 0.15-0.29) and 0.22 (95% CI: 0.17-0.28). Besides, the DOR was 18.28 (95% CI: 12.24-27.3). Then subgroup analyses based on the study design, country and age further identified the diagnostic performance of LUS for mortality risk in severe pneumonia. Conclusions: Based on our pooled analysis, LUS was demonstrated to play a role in predicting the mortality risk of severe pneumonia patients.
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.