SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2026
Definition and prognostic value of response to prone positioning in ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prone positioning in ARDS.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProne positioning improves survival in patients with ARDS; however, no consensus exists on how to define a positive response to this intervention. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to map existing definitions of response to prone position in invasively ventilated patients with ARDS and to quantify their pooled proportion across existing body of evidence. We also evaluated the association between responsiveness to prone position and mortality.
methodsWe surveyed PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to July 2025. For the primary outcome (proportion of responders), pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model with logit transformation of individual study proportions. For the secondary outcome, we performed a pairwise meta-analysis to estimate pooled odds ratios for mortality.
resultsOxygenation response, defined as a change of PaO
conclusionsDefinitions of responsiveness to prone positioning are highly heterogeneous across the literature, and the reported proportion of responders varies widely depending on the definition adopted. High risk of bias, residual confounding and substantial between-study heterogeneity, limit robust conclusions regarding the association between physiological responsiveness to prone positioning and survival. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD420251104725.
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.