ArticleIntensive care medicine2026
International evidence-based recommendations for point-of-care lung ultrasound : 2025 focused update of the 2012 recommendations.
Article in Intensive care medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Lung Ultrasound-Guided Non-Fiberobronchoscopic Bronchoalveolar Lavage for Neonatal Atelectatic Pulmonary Disease Treatment: Clinical Practice Guidelines Based on International Expert Consensus.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Guideline
- What's new in point-of-care lung ultrasound: reading the new recommendations.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond the Stethoscope: Lung Ultrasound for Risk Stratification in Acute Bronchiolitis.Indian journal of pediatrics · 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSince the publication of the previous consensus document on point-of-care lung ultrasound (PoCLUS) in 2012, new evidence has emerged. This consensus aims to update current recommendations by focusing on the clinical applications of PoCLUS as a standalone tool, while acknowledging that this focused approach represents a necessary preliminary step toward its effective integration with other organ-specific ultrasound examinations and complementary diagnostic modalities.
methodsA Delphi-based consensus process was conducted under the supervision of a Steering Committee (five voting members) and a Delphi Committee (two non-voting members). Experts were selected according to strict predefined criteria based on highly impactful scientific output and were assigned to specific domains. A structured literature review covering publications from 2012 to 2025 was performed. Statements were drafted, discussed through multiple online rounds, and iteratively refined. Anonymous voting was conducted for each statement using a predefined agreement threshold (80% full agreement); abstentions were excluded from percentage calculations. The process adhered to ACCORD recommendations.
resultsTwenty-one experts participated in the entire process. A total of 1775 new publications were reviewed, including 892 original studies, 62 meta-analyses, 38 guidelines, 162 original studies discussed in the first consensus. New statements were developed across multiple domains addressing ultrasound signs, technical aspects, monitoring strategies, and clinical applications of PoCLUS. Consensus was achieved for 83 statements following iterative discussion and voting rounds.
conclusionThis updated consensus provides evidence-based recommendations on the use of PoCLUS in clinical practice, defining its strengths and limitations as a standalone tool and identifying areas requiring further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42257880What 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.