ArticleInternational journal of pediatrics2026
Outcomes of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation via RAM Cannula in Pediatric Intensive Care: A Preliminary Report.
Article in International journal of pediatrics, 2026. 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.
- Outcomes of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation via RAM Cannula in Pediatric Intensive Care: A Preliminary Report.International 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Experience in the use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) via RAM cannula in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) is limited. Objective: The objective of this study is to describe the characteristics, outcomes, and complications of patients receiving NIPPV via RAM cannula in our PICU. Methods: A 12-month (Jan-Dec 2024) retrospective cohort study included 60 children (1 month-18 years) who received NIPPV via RAM cannula. Patients undergoing elective intubation, with do-not-resuscitate orders or with incomplete records, were excluded. Initial NIPPV settings were PEEP 5-12 cm H Result: A total of 60 were included with a median age of 15.6 months (IQR 7-41.5). Admitting diagnosis were respiratory illnesses (36; 60%), cardiac disease (9; 15%), and sepsis with MODS (6; 10%). NIPPV indications include respiratory distress in 42 (70%) patients and postextubation support in 18 (30%) patients. Success was achieved in 44 patients (73.3%). Failure was associated with comorbidities (adjusted OR 0.024, Conclusion: NIPPV is an effective respiratory support modality in the PICU. Predictors of success are lower illness severity, no comorbidities, and better oxygenation.
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.