MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prospective trial of high-frequency oscillation in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome

2001· article· en· W2155849305 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsThinkpath Engineering Services (Canada)Mount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMean airway pressureARDSAnesthesiaHigh-frequency ventilationBlood pressureHemodynamicsOxygenationRespiratory distressFraction of inspired oxygenMechanical ventilationCardiologyInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) in adult patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and oxygenation failure. DESIGN: Prospective, clinical study. SETTING: Intensive care and burn units of two university teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Twenty-four adults (10 females, 14 males, aged 48.5 +/- 15.2 yrs, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 21.5 +/- 6.9) with ARDS (lung injury score 3.4 +/- 0.6, Pao2/Fio2 98.8 +/- 39.0 mm Hg, and oxygenation index 32.5 +/- 19.6) who met one of the following criteria: Pao2 < or =65 mm Hg with Fio2 > or =0.6, or plateau pressure > or =35 cm H2O. INTERVENTIONS: HFOV was initiated in patients with ARDS after varying periods of conventional ventilation (CV). Mean airway pressure (Paw) was initially set 5 cm H2O greater than Paw during CV, and was subsequently titrated to maintain oxygen saturation between 88% and 93% and Fio2 < or =0.60. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fio2, Paw, pressure amplitude of oscillation, frequency, blood pressure, heart rate, and arterial blood gases were monitored during the transition from CV to HFOV, and every 8 hrs thereafter for 72 hrs. In 16 patients who had pulmonary artery catheters in place, cardiac hemodynamics were recorded at the same time intervals. Throughout the HFOV trial, Paw was significantly higher than that applied during CV. Within 8 hrs of HFOV application, and for the duration of the trial, Fio2 and Paco2 were lower, and Pao2/Fio2 was higher than baseline values during CV. Significant changes in hemodynamic variables following HFOV initiation included an increase in pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (at 8 and 40 hrs) and central venous pressure (at 16 and 40 hrs), and a reduction in cardiac output throughout the course of the study. There were no significant changes in systemic or pulmonary pressure associated with initiation and maintenance of HFOV. Complications occurring during HFOV included pneumothorax in two patients and desiccation of secretions in one patient. Survival at 30 days was 33%, with survivors having been mechanically ventilated for fewer days before institution of HFOV compared with nonsurvivors (1.6 +/- 1.2 vs. 7.8 +/- 5.8 days; p =.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that HFOV has beneficial effects on oxygenation and ventilation, and may be a safe and effective rescue therapy for patients with severe oxygenation failure. In addition, early institution of HFOV may be advantageous.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it