Variation in Definition of Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consistency of definitional criteria for terminology applied to describe subject cohorts receiving mechanical ventilation within ICU and post-acute care settings is important for understanding prevalence, risk stratification, effectiveness of interventions, and projections for resource allocation. Our objective was to quantify the application and definition of terms for prolonged mechanical ventilation. We conducted a scoping review of studies (all designs except single-case study) reporting a study population (adult and pediatric) using the term prolonged mechanical ventilation or a synonym. We screened 5,331 references, reviewed 539 full-text references, and excluded 120. Of the 419 studies (representing 38 countries) meeting inclusion criteria, 297 (71%) reported data on a heterogeneous subject cohort, and 66 (16%) included surgical subjects only (46 of those 66, 70% cardiac surgery). Other studies described COPD (16, 4%), trauma (22, 5%), neuromuscular (17, 4%), and sepsis (1, 0.2%) cohorts. A total of 741 terms were used to refer to the 419 study cohorts. The most common terms were: prolonged mechanical ventilation (253, 60%), admission to specialized unit (107, 26%), and long-term mechanical ventilation (79, 19%). Some authors (282, 67%) defined their cohorts based on duration of mechanical ventilation, with 154 studies (55%) using this as the sole criterion. We identified 37 different durations of ventilation ranging from 5 h to 1 y, with > 21 d being the most common (28 of 282, 7%). For studies describing a surgical cohort, minimum ventilation duration required for inclusion was ≥ 24 h for 20 of 66 studies (30%). More than half of all studies (237, 57%) did not provide a reason/rationale for definitional criteria used, with only 28 studies (7%) referring to a consensus definition. We conclude that substantial variation exists in the terminology and definitional criteria for cohorts of subjects receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation. Standardization of terminology and definitional criteria is required for study data to be maximally informative.
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 | 0.146 | 0.300 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.026 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".