MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313364804 · doi:10.1164/rccm.202204-0795so

Executive Summary: International Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pediatric Ventilator Liberation, A Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators (PALISI) Network Document

2022· review· en· W4313364804 on OpenAlexaff
Samer Abu‐Sultaneh, Narayan P. Iyer, Analía Fernández, Michael Gaies, Sebastián González‐Dambrauskas, Justin Hotz, Martin C. J. Kneyber, Yolanda M. López‐Fernández, Alexandre T. Rotta, David K. Werho, Arun Baranwal, Bronagh Blackwood, Hannah J. Craven, Martha A. Q. Curley, Sandrine Essouri, José Roberto Fioretto, Silvia Hartmann, Philippe Jouvet, Steven Kwasi Korang, Gerrard F. Rafferty, Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Louise Rose, Lyvonne N. Tume, Elizabeth C. Whipple, Judith Ju‐Ming Wong, Guillaume Émériaud, Christopher W. Mastropietro, Natalie Napolitano, Christopher J. L. Newth, Robinder G. Khemani

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchSchool of Medicine, Indiana UniversityNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteSchool of MedicineNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineExecutive summaryClinical PracticeSepsisFamily medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale Pediatric-specific ventilator liberation guidelines are lacking despite the many studies exploring elements of extubation readiness testing. The lack of clinical practice guidelines has led to significant and unnecessary variation in methods used to assess pediatric patients’ readiness for extubation. Methods Twenty-six international experts comprised a multiprofessional panel to establish pediatrics-specific ventilator liberation clinical practice guidelines, focusing on acutely hospitalized children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. Eleven key questions were identified and first prioritized using the Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence. A systematic review was conducted for questions that did not meet an a priori threshold of ≥80% agreement, with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodologies applied to develop the guidelines. The panel evaluated the evidence and drafted and voted on the recommendations. Measurements and Main Results Three questions related to systematic screening using an extubation readiness testing bundle and a spontaneous breathing trial as part of the bundle met Modified Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations criteria of ≥80% agreement. For the remaining eight questions, five systematic reviews yielded 12 recommendations related to the methods and duration of spontaneous breathing trials, measures of respiratory muscle strength, assessment of risk of postextubation upper airway obstruction and its prevention, use of postextubation noninvasive respiratory support, and sedation. Most recommendations were conditional and based on low to very low certainty of evidence. Conclusions This clinical practice guideline provides a conceptual framework with evidence-based recommendations for best practices related to pediatric ventilator liberation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.383 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations105
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207