Respective contribution of intensive care unit-acquired limb muscle and severe diaphragm weakness on weaning outcome and mortality: a post hoc analysis of two cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) and ICU-acquired diaphragm dysfunction (ICU-DD) occur frequently in mechanically ventilated (MV) patients. It is unknown whether they have different risk factors and different impacts on outcome. This study was designed to (1) describe the respective risk factors associated with ICU-AW and severe ICU-DD and (2) evaluate the respective impact of ICU-AW and severe ICU-DD on outcome. METHODS: O and ICU-AW was defined as Medical Research Council Score < 48. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were assessed. Factors independently associated with severe ICU-DD were age, longer duration of MV, and exposure to sufentanil, and those factors associated with ICU-AW were longer duration of MV and exposure to norepinephrine. Severe ICU-DD (OR 3.56, p = 0.008), but not ICU-AW, was independently associated with weaning failure (59%). ICU-AW (OR 4.30, p = 0.033), but not severe ICU-DD, was associated with ICU mortality. Weaning failure and mortality rate were higher in patients with both severe ICU-DD and ICU-AW (86% and 39%, respectively) than in patients with either severe ICU-DD (64% and 0%) or ICU-AW (63% and 13%). CONCLUSION: Severe ICU-DD and ICU-AW have different risk factors and different impacts on weaning failure and mortality. The impact of the combination of ICU-DD and ICU-AW is more pronounced than their individual impact.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".