Declining Mortality in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Analysis of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There has been multiple advances in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome, but the temporal trends in acute respiratory distress syndrome-related mortality are not well known. This study aimed to investigate the trends in mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients over time and to explore the roles of daily fluid balance and ventilation variables in those patients. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials conducted by the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network from 1996 to 2013. SETTING: Multicenter study involving Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network trials. PATIENTS: Patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASURES AND MAIN RESULTS: Individual patient data from 5,159 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients (excluding the Late Steroid Rescue Study trial) were enrolled in this study. The crude mortality rate decreased from 35.4% (95% CI, 29.9-40.8%) in 1996 to 28.3% (95% CI, 22.0-34.7%) in 2013. By adjusting for the baseline Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III, age, ICU type, and admission resource, patients enrolled from 2005 to 2010 (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.74) and those enrolled after 2010 (odds ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.92) were associated with lower risk of death as compared to those enrolled before 2000. The effect of year on mortality decline disappeared after adjustment for daily fluid balance, positive end-expiratory pressure, tidal volume, and plateau pressure. There were significant trends of declines in daily fluid balance, tidal volume, and plateau pressure and an increase in positive end-expiratory pressure over the 17 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows an improvement in the acute respiratory distress syndrome-related mortality rate in the critically ill patients enrolled in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network trials. The effect was probably mediated via decreased tidal volume, plateau pressure, and daily fluid balance and increased positive end-expiratory pressure.
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 | 0.039 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".