Summary of findings 4. Summary of findings table ‐ Good‐lung independent compared to good‐lung dependent positioning for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children.

Good‐lung independent compared to good‐lung dependent positioning for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children
Patient or population: acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children Setting: hospital (paediatric critical care unit) Intervention: good‐lung independent Comparison: good‐lung dependent positioning
Outcomes	Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	№ of participants (studies)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Risk with good‐lung dependent positioning	Risk with good‐lung independent
Mortality (respiratory events) ‐ not reported	‐	‐	‐	‐	‐	No studies reported this outcome
Oxygen saturation (SaO2) ‐ not reported	‐	‐	‐	‐	‐	No studies reported this outcome
PaO 2 (cross‐over trial) follow‐up: range 15 minutes to 45 minutes	The mean paO 2 (cross‐over trial) was 111.92 mmHg	MD 6.22 mmHg higher (21.25 lower to 33.69 higher)	‐	50 (1 RCT)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ Very lowa,b,c
Blood gases (PaCO2) ‐ not reported	‐	‐	‐	‐	‐	No studies reported this outcome
Lung function (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) ‐ not reported	‐	‐	‐	‐	‐	No studies reported this outcome
Oxygenation index (FiO2% X MPAW/PaO2) ‐ not reported	‐	‐	‐	‐	‐	No studies reported this outcome
Potential adverse outcomes (episodes of apnoea) ‐ not reported	‐	‐	‐	‐	‐	No studies reported this outcome
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.
See interactive version of this table: https://gdt.gradepro.org/presentations/#/isof/isof_question_revman_web_429747819004596191.

^a We identified significant issues due to randomisation and poor allocation concealment
^b Very large confidence intervals suggesting possible benefit or harm
^c Downgraded due to findings from very small single study