ArticleAnnals of intensive care2026
Consensus statement for managing patients with ARDS in low-resource settings: a Delphi study.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 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
48 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite decades of research and advances in critical care, mortality of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) remains high, ranging from 30 to 45% in high-income countries and markedly higher in low-resource settings (LRS), where management guidelines implementation is constrained. An international consensus aimed to provide statements for ARDS management tailored to LRS. Methods: Since management of critically ill patients is a major public health problem in LRS, the Bosnia and Herzegovina Society of Intensive Care Medicine convened an international, multidisciplinary Steering Committee with expertise in ARDS management. The committee appointed an international panel of clinicians and investigators specialized in the field of ARDS. Through an iterative Delphi process, a panel of 52 experts developed several consensus statements. Results: After three Delphi rounds, consensus was reached on 44 out of 56 of statements (79%). The survey covered eight domains related to ARDS management in LRS related to: critical care infrastructure, diagnostic tools, respiratory support, other supportive therapies, sedation strategies, weaning, nutrition, and management of complications. Statements were compared with recent ESICM guidelines, highlighting specific LRS considerations. Conclusion: Using the Delphi method, international experts developed clinical practice statements guiding clinicians on ARDS management in LRS. These statements complemented existing guidelines by addressing areas where evidence is limited, and highlight aspects of ARDS management pertinent for LRS not covered by current international recommendations. Future studies are needed to evaluate the adherence and impact of these statements and to address remaining uncertainties.
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.