MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979587958 · doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3641-8

Frequency of Screening and SBT Technique Trial - North American Weaning Collaboration (FAST-NAWC): a protocol for a multicenter, factorial randomized trial

2019· article· en· W2979587958 on OpenAlexafffund
Karen E. A. Burns, Leena Rizvi, Andrew Seely, Bram Rochwerg, François Lamontagne, John W. Devlin, Peter Dodek, Michaël Mayette, Maged Tanios, Audrey Gouskos, Phyllis Kay, Susan L. Mitchell, Kenneth C. Kiedrowski, Nicholas S. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeOttawa HospitalUniversity of OttawaImpactMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineRandomizationRandomized controlled trialMechanical ventilationIntensive careIntensive care unitSpontaneous breathing trialClinical trialCritically illWeaningMulticenter trialProtocol (science)Emergency medicineIntensive care medicineMulticenter studySurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: In critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), research supports the use of daily screening to identify patients who are ready to undergo a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) followed by conduct of an SBT. However, once daily (OD) screening is poorly aligned with the continuous care provided in most intensive care units (ICUs) and the best SBT technique for clinicians to use remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To identify the optimal screening frequency and SBT technique to wean critically ill adults in the ICU. METHODS: We aim to conduct a multicenter, factorial design randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation, comparing the effect of both screening frequency (once versus at least twice daily [ALTD]) and SBT technique (Pressure Support [PS] + Positive End-Expiratory Pressure [PEEP] vs T-piece) on the time to successful extubation (primary outcome) in 760 critically ill adults who are invasively ventilated for at least 24 h in 20 North American ICUs. In the OD arm, respiratory therapists (RTs) will screen study patients between 06:00 and 08:00 h. In the ALTD arm, patients will be screened at least twice daily between 06:00 and 08:00 h and between 13:00 and 15:00 h with additional screens permitted at the clinician's discretion. When the SBT screen is passed, an SBT will be conducted using the assigned technique (PS + PEEP or T-piece). We will follow patients until successful extubation, death, ICU discharge, or until day 60 after randomization. We will contact patients or their surrogates six months after randomization to assess health-related quality of life and functional status. RELEVANCE: The around-the-clock availability of RTs in North American ICUs presents an important opportunity to identify the optimal SBT screening frequency and SBT technique to minimize patients' exposure to invasive ventilation and ventilator-related complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov, NCT02399267 . Registered on Nov 21, 2016 first registered.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207