Patient self-inflicted lung injury and positive end-expiratory pressure for safe spontaneous breathing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The potential risks of spontaneous effort and their prevention during mechanical ventilation is an important concept for clinicians and patients. The effort-dependent lung injury has been termed 'patient self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI)' in 2017. As one of the potential strategies to render spontaneous effort less injurious in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the role of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is now discussed. RECENT FINDINGS: Experimental and clinical data indicate that vigorous spontaneous effort may worsen lung injury, whereas, at the same time, the intensity of spontaneous effort seems difficult to control when lung injury is severe. Experimental studies found that higher PEEP strategy can be effective to reduce lung injury from spontaneous effort while maintaining some muscle activity. The recent clinical trial to reevaluate systemic early neuromuscular blockade in moderate-severe ARDS (i.e., reevaluation of systemic early neuromuscular blockade (ROSE) trial) support that a higher PEEP strategy can facilitate 'safe' spontaneous breathing under the light sedation targets (i.e., no increase in barotrauma nor 90 days mortality versus early muscle paralysis). SUMMARY: To prevent P-SILI in ARDS, it seems feasible to facilitate 'safe' spontaneous breathing in patients using a higher PEEP strategy in severe ARDS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it