ArticleBMJ open2024
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAcute hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF) is one of the most common causes of admission to paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) around the world, posing a serious health concern for the global community. Non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) is considered effective in reducing mortality and intubation rates in adults. However, it is not yet clear whether NRS is beneficial for children and which NRS modalities are most effective. This network meta-analysis aims to summarise existing evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of different NRS modalities in paediatric patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To identify randomised controlled trials, we will perform a systematic search of key databases (Embase, PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL Complete and Web of Science) and registered clinical trials (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and ISRCTN). To ensure the inclusion of the latest literature, an initial pilot search was conducted on 8 July 2024, and an updated search will be conducted after the main research work of this study. AHRF in children treated with NRS will be included. Hospital mortality, intubation rate, treatment failure rate and serious adverse events are critical outcomes closely related to patient-centredness and importance. Two authors will independently select the studies and extract the data. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool V.2.0. In order to compare the effects of different NRS modalities, pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis will be conducted using R software. Several subgroup analyses will be conducted, including analyses of different causes of AHRF. We will conduct sensitivity analyses by excluding studies with a high risk of bias and those involving neonates. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology, we will assess the certainty of the evidence for the effect estimates of all the outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since this research is a network meta-analysis based on published literature, no formal ethics approval is required. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal for publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024529804.
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.