SmartCare™ versus non-automated weaning strategies for weaning time in invasively ventilated critically ill adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: The primary objective of this review is to compare weaning time (time from randomization to extubation as defined by study authors) between invasively ventilated critically ill adults weaned with SmartCare™ versus non‐automated weaning strategies. Our secondary objectives are to ascertain whether differences exist between the alternative weaning strategies and the following clinical outcomes: time to successful extubation (time from randomization to successful extubation as defined by study authors); time to first spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) and first successful SBT (time from randomization to first SBT and first successful SBT as defined by study authors); mortality (the most protracted duration and at time points reported by study authors); ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) as defined by the study authors; total duration of ventilation (time from invasive ventilation initiation to extubation as defined by the study authors); intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay; use of non‐invasive ventilation (NIV) following extubation; adverse events (including but not limited to reintubation, self‐extubation, the requirement for tracheostomy, and prolonged ventilation as defined by the study authors); clinician acceptance of the alternative weaning strategies; hospital length of stay. The third objective of our review is to explore, using subgroup analyses, variation in weaning time, ICU length of stay, mortality, VAP, use of NIV, and reintubation by the type of (i) clinician primarily involved in implementing the SmartCare™ weaning strategy, (ii) ICU (as a reflection of the population involved) and (iii) non‐automated weaning strategy utilized. We plan to conduct a sensitivity analysis evaluating variation in weaning time based on the (iv) methodologic quality (low or moderate versus high risk of bias) of the included studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".