ReviewCritical care (London, England)2021
To prone or not to prone ARDS patients on ECMO.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effect of prone positioning in adult patients receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Prone position enhances oxygenation and facilitates weaning from percutaneous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in infants after the bidirectional Glenn procedure.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Article
- Prone position ventilation-induced oxygenation improvement as a valuable predictor of survival in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective observational study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Observational
- Proning the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation plus Impella: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2024Article
- Prone positioning in ARDS patients supported with VV ECMO, what we should explore?Journal of intensive care · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2021. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2021 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from https://link.springer.com/bookseries/8901 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.