Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42661009›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of pediatrics2026

Non-invasive ventilation in the delivery room.

Sherry E Courtney

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sherry E CourtneyArkansas Children's Hospital, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, One Children's Way, Little Rock, AR, 72202, USA. secourtney@uams.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-invasive respiratory support in the delivery room (DR) is a relatively new concept. Now, instead of immediately intubating most babies in respiratory distress, initial use of nasal CPAP or intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is recommended, to prevent lung injury. How to best implement non-invasive ventilation is still under investigation. What are the best levels of nasal CPAP, is NIPPV better to employ, and how can we synchronize breaths with the infant's efforts are all questions that are not yet answered.

conclusionThis article reviews the history of DR respiratory resuscitation, and explores the questions that yet remain as to the best approach. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Nasal CPAP is recommended as the first intervention for the neonate requiring respiratory support in the delivery room. • Ideal ways to provide nCPAP, NIPPV, surfactant, and prolonged respiratory support are not yet known but are being widely investigated. WHAT IS NEW: • Non-invasive intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is now often recommended in the DR either if nCPAP fails, or at the start of respiratory support. • Important areas for future research include how best to provide non-invasive support, and what may be effective in the extremely low birth weight infant population.

Indexed as

Delivery RoomsNoninvasive VentilationRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornContinuous Positive Airway PressureHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureIntermittent Positive-Pressure VentilationDelivery room managementInfant ventilationNon-invasive ventilation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.