Reply to Bancalari et al . and to Isayama and Shah

The authors convey their reactions to the comment about their study that intends to provide an evidence-based definition of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). They impart how they conceded that a single definition of BPD is unlikely to serve all purposes. Yet, they stress their belief that their stud...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine Vol. 200; no. 10; pp. 1324 - 1325
Main Author Jensen, Erik A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States American Thoracic Society 15.11.2019
Subjects
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia
Chronic illnesses
Correspondence
Definitions
Humans
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Infant, Premature
Infant, Premature, Diseases
Infant, Very Low Birth Weight
Lung diseases
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The authors convey their reactions to the comment about their study that intends to provide an evidence-based definition of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). They impart how they conceded that a single definition of BPD is unlikely to serve all purposes. Yet, they stress their belief that their study has offered valuable information on how best to define BPD in the current period.
Bibliography:SourceType-Other Sources-1
content type line 63
ObjectType-Correspondence-1
ObjectType-Commentary-2
ISSN:1073-449X
1535-4970
DOI:10.1164/rccm.201906-1233LE