SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Accuracy of artificial intelligence algorithms in predicting acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence-assisted Diagnosis of Carotid Artery Calcifications on Panoramic Radiographs: A Meta-analysis.International dental journal · 2026Pooled it
- Mamba-Bi-LSTM with SHAP-Guided Iterative Refinement for Multimodal ARDS Diagnosis: A Dual-System Framework.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Current Insights into Clinical, Molecular, and Therapeutic Approaches to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine.Thoracic research and practice · 2025Article
- Multimodal Deep Learning for ARDS Detection.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Prevalence, Outcomes and Healthcare Costs of Postoperative ARDS Compared with Medical ARDS.Journal of clinical 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a serious threat to human life. Hence, early and accurate diagnosis and treatment are crucial for patient survival. This meta-analysis evaluates the accuracy of artificial intelligence in the early diagnosis of ARDS and provides guidance for future research and applications.
methodsA search on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM), and VIP databases was systematically conducted, from their establishment to November 2023, to obtain eligible studies for the analysis and evaluation of the predictive effect of AI on ARDS. The retrieved literature was screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, the quality of the included studies was assessed using QUADAS-2, and the included studies were statistically analyzed.
resultsAmong the 2, 996 studies, 33 were included in this meta-analysis, which showed that the pooled sensitivity of AI in predicting ARDS was 0.81 (0.76-0.85), the pooled specificity was 0.88 (0.84-0.91), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.91 (0.88-0.93). The analyzed studies included 28 models, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 (0.76-0.82), a pooled specificity of 0.85 (0.83-0.88), and an AUC of 0.89 (0.86-0.91). In the subgroup analysis, the pooled AUC of the AI models ANN, CNN, LR, RF, SVM, and XGB were 0.86 (0.83-0.89), 0.91 (0.88-0.93), 0.86 (0.83-0.89), and 0.89 (0.86-0.91), 0.90 (0.87-0.92), 0.93 (0.90-0.95), respectively. In an additional subgroup analysis, we evaluated the predictive performance of the AI models trained using different predictors. This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023491546).
conclusionAI has good sensitivity and specificity for predicting ARDS, indicating a high clinical application value. Algorithmic models such as CNN, SVM, and XGB have improved prediction performance. The subgroup analysis revealed that the model trained using images combined with other predictors had the best predictive performance.
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.