MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753000083 · doi:10.1183/13993003.02426-2016

Official ERS/ATS clinical practice guidelines: noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure

2017· review· en· W2753000083 on OpenAlexaff
Bram Rochwerg, Laurent Brochard, Mark Elliott, Dean Hess, Nicholas S. Hill, Stefano Nava, Paolo Navalesi, Massimo Antonelli, Jan Brożek, Giorgio Conti, Miquel Ferrer, Kalpalatha K. Guntupalli, Samir Jaber, Sean Keenan, Jordi Mancebo, Sangeeta Mehta, Suhail Raoof

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaRoyal Columbian HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcute respiratory failureClinical PracticeIntensive care medicineRespiratory failureVentilation (architecture)Noninvasive ventilationMechanical ventilationInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) is widely used in the acute care setting for acute respiratory failure (ARF) across a variety of aetiologies. This document provides European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society recommendations for the clinical application of NIV based on the most current literature. The guideline committee was composed of clinicians, methodologists and experts in the field of NIV. The committee developed recommendations based on the GRADE (Grading, Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology for each actionable question. The GRADE Evidence to Decision framework in the guideline development tool was used to generate recommendations. A number of topics were addressed using technical summaries without recommendations and these are discussed in the supplementary material. This guideline committee developed recommendations for 11 actionable questions in a PICO (population–intervention–comparison–outcome) format, all addressing the use of NIV for various aetiologies of ARF. The specific conditions where recommendations were made include exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiogenic pulmonary oedema, de novo hypoxaemic respiratory failure, immunocompromised patients, chest trauma, palliation, post-operative care, weaning and post-extubation. This document summarises the current state of knowledge regarding the role of NIV in ARF. Evidence-based recommendations provide guidance to relevant stakeholders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.008
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.010

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 head0.388
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.145 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1,617
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207