Patterns of Non-Invasive Ventilation in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) improves quality of life and survival in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and respiratory symptoms. Little is known about the patterns of NIV use over time and the impact of NIV on end-of-life decision-making in ALS. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the pattern of NIV use over the course of the disease and the timing of end-of-life discussions in people living with ALS. METHOD: A retrospective single-center cohort study was performed at London Health Sciences Centre. Daily NIV duration of use was evaluated at 3-month intervals. The timing of diagnosis, NIV initiation, discussions relating to do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) and death were examined. RESULTS: In total, 48 patients were included in the analysis. Duration of NIV use increased over time, and tolerance to NIV was observed to be better than expected in patients with bulbar-onset ALS. There was a high degree of variability in the timing of end-of-life discussions in patients with ALS (356±451 days from diagnosis). In this cohort, there was a strong association between the timing of discussions regarding code status and establishment of a DNAR order (r2=0.93). CONCLUSION: This retrospective cohort study suggests that the use of NIV in ALS increases over time and that there remains a great deal of variability in the timing of end-of-life discussions in people living with ALS. Future prospective studies exploring the use NIV over the disease trajectory and how NIV affects end-of-life decision-making in people with ALS are needed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".