Trial reportIndian journal of pediatrics2026
Effect of Prone Positioning on Ventilation in Preterm Neonates - A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Prone Positioning on Ventilation in Preterm Neonates - A Randomized Controlled Trial: Correspondence.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Effect of Prone Positioning on Ventilation in Preterm Neonates - A Randomized Controlled Trial: Authors' Reply.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the effect of prone positioning on the duration of respiratory support in neonates receiving non-invasive mode of ventilation.
methodsThis open label randomized controlled trial was conducted in the NICU of a tertiary care hospital. Preterm neonates who fulfilled the eligibility criteria for enrolment were included within 6 h of starting non-invasive respiratory support. Neonates in intervention group were given respiratory support in the prone position. After every 90 min of prone positioning, the position was changed to side lying/supine position for 30 min in the intervention group. The comparator group were given respiratory support in the supine position with 2 hourly changes in position (supine-side lying-prone). The primary outcome was duration of non-invasive ventilation.
resultsDuration of non-invasive ventilation did not reduce in the intervention group. {[h; 80 (36 to 127) vs. 93.5 (42 to 142)], median difference (h) -8, 95% CI: -30 to 13, p = 0.47} Neonates in the prone group had significantly lower peak FiO2 requirements [30 (30–30) vs. 35 (30–50), p = 0.01] and frequency of apnea [episodes per day; 0.4 (0.2–1) vs. 1 (0.4–1.6), p = 0.04].
conclusionsProne positioning did not reduce the duration of non-invasive respiratory support in preterm neonates. CLINICAL
trial registrationCTRI/2021/10/037183
Indexed as
Identifiers
41831162What 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.