MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225418915 · doi:10.1136/bmj-2021-068723

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with acute covid-19 associated respiratory failure: comparative effectiveness study

2022· article· en· W4225418915 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersExtracorporeal Life Support Organization
KeywordsMedicineExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationConfidence intervalFraction of inspired oxygenMechanical ventilationIntensive care unitRespiratory failureConfoundingAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To estimate the effect of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) compared with conventional mechanical ventilation on outcomes of patients with covid-19 associated respiratory failure. Design Observational study. Setting 30 countries across five continents, 3 January 2020 to 29 August 2021. Participants 7345 adults admitted to the intensive care unit with clinically suspected or laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interventions ECMO in patients with a partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ) ratio <80 mm Hg compared with conventional mechanical ventilation without ECMO. Main outcome measure The primary outcome was hospital mortality within 60 days of admission to the intensive care unit. Adherence adjusted estimates were calculated using marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting, accounting for competing events and for baseline and time varying confounding. Results 844 of 7345 eligible patients (11.5%) received ECMO at any time point during follow-up. Adherence adjusted mortality was 26.0% (95% confidence interval 24.5% to 27.5%) for a treatment strategy that included ECMO if the PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio decreased <80 mm Hg compared with 33.2% (31.8% to 34.6%) had patients received conventional treatment without ECMO (risk difference –7.1%, 95% confidence interval –8.2% to –6.1%; risk ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.82). In secondary analyses, ECMO was most effective in patients aged <65 years and with a PaO 2 /FiO 2 <80 mm Hg or with driving pressures >15 cmH 2 O during the first 10 days of mechanical ventilation. Conclusions ECMO was associated with a reduction in mortality in selected adults with covid-19 associated respiratory failure. Age, severity of hypoxaemia, and duration and intensity of mechanical ventilation were found to be modifiers of treatment effectiveness and should be considered when deciding to initiate ECMO in patients with covid-19.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.257 · 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