SynthesisPloS one2026
Prevalence and risk factors for AMS: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute Mountain Sickness (AMS) is a high-altitude-specific condition with variable prevalence and poorly defined risk factors. Despite growing global exposure to high-altitude environments, no systematic review has comprehensively synthesized AMS epidemiology.
objectivesTo assess the prevalence of AMS and critically evaluate evidence on risk factors associated with increased susceptibility.
designA systematic review and meta-analysis following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL Plus, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI), Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), and Weipu Database (VIP) were comprehensively searched for observational studies investigating the prevalence and risk factors of AMS from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2024. REVIEW
methodsOriginal journal articles were included which met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the included studies was evaluated independently by two investigators. Meta-analysis was conducted using R software (v4.2.2), with estimates of AMS from pooled using a random-effects model.
resultsFifty-eight studies (n = 2,705) were included. The pooled AMS prevalence was 48.25% (95% CI: 42.58-53.96%), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 82.3%). Significant risk factors included extreme altitude (>5500 m; RR = 1.89), rapid ascent (<6 h; RR = 1.60), marked heart rate increase (>20 bpm; RR = 2.35), and oxygen saturation decline (>10%; RR = 2.02). Prior AMS history (RR = 1.36) and male sex (RR = 1.15) were also associated with higher risk, while older age (>50 years) was protective (RR = 0.78).
conclusionAMS affects nearly half of high-altitude visitors. Altitude, ascent rate, cardiopulmonary response, and prior AMS history are key risk determinants. These findings support pre-exposure risk stratification, staged ascent protocols, and real-time physiological monitoring. PROSPERO CRD42024595365.
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.