Cited by 151Hemodynamic Monitoring and TherapySepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors

Accuracy and repeatability of pediatric cardiac output measurement using Doppler: 20-Year review of the literature

Chew, Michelle S., Poelaert, Jan·2003·Intensive Care Medicine

Abstract

Objective Review of the accuracy and repeatability of Doppler cardiac output (CO) measurements in children.Design Publications in the scientific literature retrieved using a computerized Medline search from 1982-2002 and a manual review of article bibliographies. Studies comparing Doppler flow measurements with thermodilution, Fick, or dye dilution methods in the pediatric critical care setting were identified to assess the bias, precision, and intra- and interobserver repeatability of Doppler CO measurement. Where results were not suitable for comparison and the original measurements available, data were re-analyzed using appropriate statistical methods and presented in comparative tables.Results The precision of pediatric Doppler CO measurements compared to thermodilution, dye dilution, or Fick methods is around 30% and repeatability varies from less than 1% to 22%. Bias is generally less than 10% but varies considerably.Conclusions The bias, precision, and repeatability from study to study indicate that Doppler CO measurements are acceptably reproducible in children, with best results when used to track changes rather than absolute values, and using the transesophageal approach.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00134-003-1967-9

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite its known limitations, including relatively high intra- and interobserver variability (coefficient of variation ranging from 2.1% to 22% and 3.1% to 22%, respectively), echocardiography remains the most widely adopted modality in neonatal and pediatric intensive care.

    “Despite its known limitations, including relatively high intra- and interobserver variability (coefficient of variation ranging from 2.1% to 22% and 3.1% to 22%, respectively) [58], echocardiography remains the most widely adopted modality in neonatal and pediatric intensive care.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chew, M. S., & Poelaert, J.
Affiliations
  • Skåne University Hospital (SE)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
Corresponding author
Chew, Michelle S.
Venue
Intensive Care Medicine
Published
2003-11-01
Volume
29
Issue
11
Pages
1889-1894
ISSN
  • 0342-4642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1238
OpenAlex
W2074626476
Cited by
151
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
FWCI
3.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Intensive Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Keywords
measurement accuracy, repeatability, thermodilution, Fick method, dye dilution, esophageal Doppler, pediatric intensive care, measurement bias
MeSH terms
Cardiac Output, Child, Critical Care, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Dye Dilution Technique, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Research Design, Sensitivity and Specificity, Thermodilution, Echocardiography, Doppler, Reproducibility of Results, Bias, Echocardiography, Transesophageal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review