ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2024
Ultrasound quantification of pleural effusion volume in supine position: comparison of three model formulae.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of ultrasound to predict severe disease in patients with dengue and other viral infections associated with hemorrhagic fevers.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Expanding Horizons of Pediatric POCUS: Applications in the Older Child.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Assessment of pleural effusion using intracavitary contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a pilot study.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Can indwelling pleural catheters provide additional benefits in elderly heart failure patients with pleural effusion? A real-world retrospective multicenter analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Association of pleural effusion on thoracic ultrasound with severe acute pancreatitis and mortality.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate the accuracy of three model formulae for ultrasound quantification of pleural effusion (PE) volume in patients in supine position.
methodsA prospective study including 100 patients with thoracentesis and drainage of PE was conducted. Three model formulae (single section model, two section model and multi-section model) were used to calculate the PE volume. The correlation and consistency analyses between calculated volumes derived from three models and actual PE volume were performed.
resultsPE volumes calculated by three models all showed significant linear correlations with actual PE volume in supine position (all p < 0.001). The reliability of multi-section model in predicting PE volume was significantly higher than that of single section model and slightly higher than that of two section model. When compared with actual drainage volume, the intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) of single section model, two section model and multi-section model were 0.72, 0.97 and 0.99, respectively. Significant consistency between calculated PE volumes by using two section model and multi-section model existed for full PE volume range (ICC 0.98).
conclusionBased on the convenience and accuracy of ultrasound quantification of PE volume, two section model is recommended for pleural effusion assessment in routine clinic, though different model formulae can be selected according to clinical needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.