Neuroventilatory efficiency and extubation readiness in critically ill patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Based on the hypothesis that failure of weaning from mechanical ventilation is caused by respiratory demand exceeding the capacity of the respiratory muscles, we evaluated whether extubation failure could be characterized by increased respiratory drive and impaired efficiency to generate inspiratory pressure and ventilation. METHODS: Airway pressure, flow, volume, breathing frequency, and diaphragm electrical activity were measured in a heterogeneous group of patients deemed ready for a spontaneous breathing trial. Efficiency to convert neuromuscular activity into inspiratory pressure was calculated as the ratio of negative airway pressure and diaphragm electrical activity during an inspiratory occlusion. Efficiency to convert neuromuscular activity into volume was calculated as the ratio of the tidal volume to diaphragm electrical activity. All variables were obtained during a 30-minute spontaneous breathing trial on continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) of 5 cm H₂O and compared between patients for whom extubation succeeded with those for whom either the spontaneous breathing trial failed or for those who passed, but then the extubation failed. RESULTS: Of 52 patients enrolled in the study, 35 (67.3%) were successfully extubated, and 17 (32.7%) were not. Patients for whom it failed had higher diaphragm electrical activity (48%; P < 0.001) and a lower efficiency to convert neuromuscular activity into inspiratory pressure and tidal volume (40% (P < 0.001) and 53% (P < 0.001)), respectively. Neuroventilatory efficiency demonstrated the greatest predictability for weaning success. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a mixed group of critically ill patients for whom weaning fails have increased neural respiratory drive and impaired ability to convert neuromuscular activity into tidal ventilation, in part because of diaphragm weakness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01065428.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".