SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Machine learning-based prediction models for noninvasive respiratory support failure in acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early identification of noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) failure in acute respiratory failure (ARF) is clinically relevant, as delayed intubation is associated with worse outcomes. Machine learning-based prediction models have been proposed to support escalation decisions, but their performance and reliability remain uncertain. Objective: To systematically evaluate the discriminative performance of machine learning-based models for predicting NIRS failure in adults with ARF. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered the protocol in PROSPERO (CRD420251167330). PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from January 2010 to the final search date. Cohort studies developing or validating machine learning models to predict NIRS failure, primarily defined as endotracheal intubation, were included. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Logit-transformed AUCs were synthesized using random-effects models with restricted maximum likelihood estimation and Hartung-Knapp confidence intervals. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using PROBAST-AI and GRADE, respectively. Results: Fourteen cohort studies comprising 34,500 patients were included. The descriptive pooled AUC was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.89) with extreme heterogeneity (I Conclusion: Machine learning-based models demonstrate moderate discrimination; however, extreme heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and very low certainty of evidence preclude clinical implementation. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251167330.
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.