Cited by 48Neonatal Respiratory Health ResearchRespiratory Support and MechanismsNeuroscience of respiration and sleep

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) to treat respiratory distress in newborns in low- and middle-income countries

Open access
Dewez, Juan Emmanuel, van den Broek, Nynke·2017·Tropical Doctor

Abstract

Severe respiratory distress is a serious complication common to the three major causes of neonatal mortality and morbidity (prematurity, intra-partum-related hypoxia and infections). In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), 20% of babies presenting with severe respiratory distress die. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), is an effective intervention for respiratory distress in newborns and widely used in high-income countries. Following the development of simple, safe and relatively inexpensive CPAP devices, there is potential for large-scale implementation in the developing world. In this article, we describe existing CPAP systems and present a review of the current literature examining the effectiveness of CPAP compared to standard care (oxygen) in newborns with respiratory distress. We also discuss the evidence gap which needs to be addressed prior to its integration into health systems in LMICs.

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 · 10.1177/0049475516630210

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dewez, J. E., & van den Broek, N.
Affiliations
  • Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • Head, Centre for Maternal and Child Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK
Corresponding author
Dewez, Juan Emmanuel
Venue
Tropical Doctor
Published
2016-07-10
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
19-22
ISSN
  • 0049-4755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-1133
OpenAlex
W2273311508
Cited by
48
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 2
FWCI
3.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tropical Doctor (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSTM Online Archive (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Neonatal Respiratory Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroscience of respiration and sleep
Keywords
continuous positive airway pressure, neonatal respiratory distress, neonates, low- and middle-income countries, CPAP devices, oxygen therapy, preterm infants, neonatal mortality, health system integration, evidence gaps
MeSH terms
Developing Countries, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Premature, Oxygen Inhalation Therapy, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn, Intensive Care, Neonatal, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

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