SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2026
Fragility index-based robustness assessment of RCT-driven meta-analyses in hospital-acquired infection management.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are a major global health concern, increasing patient morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. While randomized controlled trial (RCT)-based meta-analyses (MAs) have played a critical role in guiding infection control strategies, their methodological quality and robustness remain uncertain. The fragility index (FI), an event-level metric, offers a complementary perspective to conventional sensitivity analyses by quantifying the stability of statistical significance against small changes in event counts.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science was conducted for RCT-based MAs on HAI management published between January 2020 and June 2025. Eligible MAs reported pooled binary outcomes as RR, OR, or RD. FI was calculated using an online calculator. Study characteristics were extracted, and potential determinants of robustness were examined using LASSO-based variable selection followed by multivariable logistic regression, and further interpreted using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP).
resultsA total of 171 studies comprising 440 MAs were included. The overall median FI was 7, with 61.14% of MAs demonstrating FI > 5, indicating moderate robustness. Logistic regression identified the number of included RCTs (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02–1.11) and total number of events (per 50 events) (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01–1.07) as significant factors associated with robustness. SHAP analysis confirmed their predominant influence on FI.
conclusionMost RCT-based MAs in HAI management exhibited moderate robustness, with FI strongly driven by the number of included RCTs and events. Routine reporting of FI in future MAs is recommended to enhance transparency and reliability. Integration with complementary approaches such as trial sequential analysis and bias adjustment may further strengthen evidence synthesis in infection management. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.