SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Prognosis of neonates receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in low-resource settings: a systematic review and prognostic meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of pediatrics, 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
Provision of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in the neonatal intensive care has seen a steady rise in low-esource settings (LRS). However, outcomes among those exposed to IMV remain under-reported, with the current evidence base being restricted to single-centre observational studies, thus limiting comparative analyses and effective healthcare planning. This study aims to estimate the pooled proportion of mortality and morbidity among neonates exposed to IMV in low-resource settings. Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched until 22 August 2025. Randomised and non-randomised studies were included. Two reviewers, blinded to each other, extracted data independently. Proportion-based meta-analyses using random-effects model were performed. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-E, and evidence-certainty was evaluated using the GRADE approach. One hundred of 117 studies were included, with most conducted in South Asia. In-hospital mortality was reported in 68 studies (7193 neonates), with a pooled estimate of 45% (39%-50%), evidence-certainty being very low. Among the secondary outcomes, the pooled rates were as follows: bronchopulmonary dysplasia, 10% (5%-18%); intraventricular haemorrhage (any grade), 10% (5%-19%); necrotising enterocolitis (any stage), 14% (6%-31%); retinopathy of prematurity (any stage), 33% (22%-46%); ventilator-associated pneumonia, 21% (14%-29%); sepsis, 32% (25%-40%) and pulmonary haemorrhage, 9% (6%-14%). Evidence-certainty for all the secondary outcomes was also very low. Subgroup analysis comparing two distinct time epochs revealed a significant difference in mortality, 43% (36%-50%) (I
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.