ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022
Comparison of high flow nasal cannula and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in children with bronchiolitis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory support in paediatric patients with bronchiolitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- High-flow nasal cannula versus continuous positive airway pressure for noninvasive respiratory support in children with bronchiolitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- "Comparison between high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in children with acute respiratory failure by bronchiolitis: a randomized controlled trial".BMC pediatrics · 2024Trial
- Review
- Risk factors and outcomes of pediatric non-invasive respiratory support failure in Latin America.Journal of intensive medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) compared to non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) on children with bronchiolitis remain unclear. Methods: This meta-analysis was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from a comprehensive search in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science without time and language limitations. Primary endpoints include the rate of treatment failure, the rate of need for intubation, and the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) length of stay. Results: Five RCTs including 541 children of less than 24 months were enrolled in the meta-analysis. Compared to the NIPPV group, the rate of treatment failure was significantly higher in the HFNC treatment group ( Conclusion: Compared to the NIPPV group, HFNC therapy was associated with a significantly higher treatment failure rate in children suffering from bronchiolitis. The intubation rate and the PICU length of stay were comparable between the two approaches.
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.