ArticleIndian journal of pediatrics
Assisted ventilation in neonates: the Manipal experience.
Article in Indian journal of pediatrics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognosis of neonates receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in low-resource settings: a systematic review and prognostic meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Clinicoetiological Pattern and Outcome of Neonates Requiring Mechanical Ventilation: Study in a Tertiary Care Centre.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2018Article
- An experience with neonatal ventilation in eastern U.P.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2009Article
- Neonatal mechanical ventilation.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2003Article
- Conventional ventilation in neonates: experience from Saudi Arabia.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2002Article
- Neonatal mechanical ventilation--experience at a level II care centre.Indian journal of pediatricsArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Case records of 68 newborns who required assisted ventilation over a 24 month period were reviewed. Fortyfour (64.7%) received intermittent mandatory ventilation, 10 (14.7%) received nasal CPAP and the remaining 14 (20.58%) received a combination of the above. Some of the indications for ventilation were infections (21), hyaline membrane disease (16), problems related to asphyxia (11), apnea of prematurity (10) and persistent pulmonary hypertension of newborn (5). The overall survival rate was 41.17%. In the CPAP group 90% (9/10) survived, while in the remaining survival was 32.7% (19/58). The best outcome was observed in persistent pulmonary hypertension of newborn (80%) followed by apnea of prematurity (70%) and hyaline membrane disease (43.75). Outcome was poor in conditions related to birth asphyxia (27.2%) and infections (19.05%). Survival rates were higher (44.4%) in babies weighing > 1500g at birth as compared to 40.9% in babies < 1500g. Babies less than 32 weeks gestation had a survival rate of 32% as compared to 46.5% in those over 32 weeks. This difference was not statistically significant. Complications were seen in 12/68 patients (17.6%). Pneumothorax was the commonest followed by sepsis, intraventricular hemorrhage and blocked endotracheal tubes. Babies with hyaline membrane disease had the highest incidence of complications. Analysis of the data with regard to the indications, outcome and complications is presented.
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.