A target backrest elevation of 45° was not feasible for mechanically ventilated patients; elevations achieved did not prevent ventilator associated pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
van Nieuwenhoven CA, Vandenbroucke-Grauls C, van Tiel FH, et al. Feasibility and effects of the semirecumbent position to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomized study. Crit Care Med 2006;34:396–402.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q In critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation, is a semirecumbent position of 45° feasible and effective for prevention of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP)? ### ![Graphic][5]</img>Design: randomised controlled trial. ### ![Graphic][6]</img>Allocation: concealed. ### ![Graphic][7]</img>Blinding: blinded (outcome assessors). ### ![Graphic][8]</img>Follow up period: median 5–6 days (range 0–64 d). ### ![Graphic][9]</img>Setting: 4 intensive care units (ICUs) in 3 university hospitals in the Netherlands. ### ![Graphic][10]</img>Patients: 221 adults (mean age 64 y, 63% men) who were intubated within 24 hours of ICU admission and had an expected duration of ventilation ⩾48 hours. ### ![Graphic][11]</img>Intervention: semirecumbent position (backrest 45° from horizontal) (n = 112) or supine position (10°) (n = 109) for the duration of ventilation. A nurse … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCritical%2Bcare%2Bmedicine%26rft.stitle%253DCrit%2BCare%2BMed%26rft.aulast%253Dvan%2BNieuwenhoven%26rft.auinit1%253DC.%2BA.%26rft.volume%253D34%26rft.issue%253D2%26rft.spage%253D396%26rft.epage%253D402%26rft.atitle%253DFeasibility%2Band%2Beffects%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bsemirecumbent%2Bposition%2Bto%2Bprevent%2Bventilator-associated%2Bpneumonia%253A%2Ba%2Brandomized%2Bstudy.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1097%252F01.CCM.0000198529.76602.5E%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F16424720%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/01.CCM.0000198529.76602.5E&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=16424720&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F9%2F4%2F117.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000235065500016&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif [9]: /embed/inline-graphic-5.gif [10]: /embed/inline-graphic-6.gif [11]: /embed/inline-graphic-7.gif
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".