Spontaneous awakening trials plus spontaneous breathing trials improved weaning from mechanical ventilationCommentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
T D Girard Dr T D Girard, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA; timothy.girard@vanderbilt.edu In sedated patients on mechanical ventilation, are daily spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) combined with spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) more effective for ventilator weaning than daily SBTs with sedation per usual care? ### Design: randomised controlled trial. ### Allocation: concealed. ### Blinding: unblinded. ### Follow-up period: 1 year. ### Setting: 4 medical intensive care units (ICUs) in the USA. ### Patients: 336 patients ⩾18 years of age (median age 61 y, 52% men) who required mechanical ventilation for ⩾12 hours and were receiving patient-targeted sedation. Exclusion criteria included admission after cardiac arrest, continuous ventilation for ⩾2 weeks, and profound neurological deficits. ### Intervention: daily SAT followed by SBT (n = 168) or daily SBT with sedation per usual care (n = 168). In the SAT + SBT group, patients who passed an SAT safety screen had an SAT. Patients who failed the SAT were restarted on sedatives at half …
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 | 0.005 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".