Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,613

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome – 2019 Update

Open access
Sweet, David G., Carnielli, Virgilio, Greisen, Gorm, Hallman, Mikko, Ozek, Eren, te Pas, Arjan, Plavka, Richard, Roehr, Charles C., Saugstad, Ola D., Simeoni, Umberto, Speer, Christian P., Vento, Maximo, Visser, Gerhard H.A., Halliday, Henry L.·2019·Neonatology

Abstract

As management of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) advances, clinicians must continually revise their current practice. We report the fourth update of “European Guidelines for the Management of RDS” by a European panel of experienced neonatologists and an expert perinatal obstetrician based on available literature up to the end of 2018. Optimising outcome for babies with RDS includes prediction of risk of preterm delivery, need for appropriate maternal transfer to a perinatal centre and timely use of antenatal steroids. Delivery room management has become more evidence-based, and protocols for lung protection including initiation of CPAP and titration of oxygen should be implemented immediately after birth. Surfactant replacement therapy is a crucial part of management of RDS, and newer protocols for its use recommend early administration and avoidance of mechanical ventilation. Methods of maintaining babies on non-invasive respiratory support have been further developed and may cause less distress and reduce chronic lung disease. As technology for delivering mechanical ventilation improves, the risk of causing lung injury should decrease, although minimising time spent on mechanical ventilation using caffeine and, if necessary, postnatal steroids are also important considerations. Protocols for optimising general care of infants with RDS are also essential with good temperature control, careful fluid and nutritional management, maintenance of perfusion and judicious use of antibiotics all being important determinants of best outcome.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000499361

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 1,613

Metadata

Authors
Sweet, D. G., Carnielli, V., Greisen, G., Hallman, M., Ozek, E., te Pas, A., Plavka, R., Roehr, C. C., Saugstad, O. D., Simeoni, U., Speer, C. P., Vento, M., Visser, G. H. A., & Halliday, H. L.
Venue
Neonatology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2019
Volume
115
Issue
4
Pages
432-450
ISSN
  • 1661-7800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1661-7819
OpenAlex
W2936595371
Cited by
1,613
References
4
FWCI
153.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome – 2019 Update. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000499361
The paper
Sweet, D. G., Carnielli, V., Greisen, G., Hallman, M., Ozek, E., te Pas, A., Plavka, R., Roehr, C. C., Saugstad, O. D., Simeoni, U., Speer, C. P., Vento, M., Visser, G. H. A., & Halliday, H. L. (2019). European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome – 2019 Update. Neonatology. https://doi.org/10.1159/000499361

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.