2007
DOI: 10.1590/s0104-42302007000300019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ventilação de alta freqüência em crianças e adolescentes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo (impacto sobre o uso de ecmo)

Abstract: INTRODUÇÃOO objetivo inicial desta revisão, que resultou em uma tese de mestrado apresentada em 1998, foi encontrar uma modalidade terapêutica que resultasse em redução da mortalidade de crianças e adolescentes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo (SDRA). Propusemo-nos a atualizar esta revisão por meio de uma busca informatizada da literatura médica. Inicialmente, verificamos a existência de publicações sobre o tema e encontramos apenas uma revisão sistemática na faixa etária objeto do estudo, public… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Crosssectional studies and case reports were the most frequent design type in both journals, representing over 50% of all the clinical articles published during that year. Out of the 289 articles published in 2007, four were randomized (or quasi-randomized) trials [9][10][11][12] and four were systematic reviews, [13][14][15][16] thus representing less than 2% of the total number of published papers in both of these journals. After exclusion of six clinical guidelines [17][18][19][20][21][22] and 80 non-evidence articles (technical notes, clinical measurement validation studies, continuing medical education, quizzes and others) the distribution of the remaining 203 articles is presented in Table 2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Crosssectional studies and case reports were the most frequent design type in both journals, representing over 50% of all the clinical articles published during that year. Out of the 289 articles published in 2007, four were randomized (or quasi-randomized) trials [9][10][11][12] and four were systematic reviews, [13][14][15][16] thus representing less than 2% of the total number of published papers in both of these journals. After exclusion of six clinical guidelines [17][18][19][20][21][22] and 80 non-evidence articles (technical notes, clinical measurement validation studies, continuing medical education, quizzes and others) the distribution of the remaining 203 articles is presented in Table 2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the Oxford criteria, 25.6% of the articles were classified as level 4 or 5 evidence, while 2.8% were level 1. Table 3 presents the AMSTAR scores of the four systematic reviews [13][14][15][16] published during 2007 in the two journals. The overall scores ranged from 1 to 6, with a mean score of 4.0 (standard deviation: 2.2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%