MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317567767 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000005739

Methodological and Clinimetric Evaluation of Inspiratory Respiratory Muscle Ultrasound in the Critical Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2023· review· en· W4317567767 on OpenAlexaff
Dominic Truong, Shaza Abo, Georgina A. Whish‐Wilson, Aruska N. D’Souza, Lisa Beach, Sunita Mathur, Kirby P. Mayer, George Ntoumenopoulos, Claire Baldwin, Doa El‐Ansary, Michael T. Paris, Marina Mourtzakis, Peter E. Morris, Amy M. Pastva, Catherine L. Granger, Selina M. Parry, Aarti Sarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooWestern UniversityQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute on AgingNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesAmerican Thoracic SocietyIntensive Care SocietyBiogenNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundIntercostal muscleDiaphragm (acoustics)Erector spinae musclesRadiologyNuclear medicineRespiratory systemInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationElectromyography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Significant variations exist in the use of respiratory muscle ultrasound in intensive care with no society-level consensus on the optimal methodology. This systematic review aims to evaluate, synthesize, and compare the clinimetric properties of different image acquisition and analysis methodologies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search of five databases up to November 24, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they enrolled at least 50 adult ICU patients, reported respiratory muscle (diaphragm or intercostal) ultrasound measuring either echotexture, muscle thickness, thickening fraction, or excursion, and evaluated at least one clinimetric property. Two independent reviewers assessed titles, abstracts, and full text against eligibility. DATA EXTRACTION: Study demographics, ultrasound methodologies, and clinimetric data. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixty studies, including 5,025 patients, were included with 39 studies contributing to meta-analyses. Most commonly measured was diaphragm thickness (DT) or diaphragm thickening fraction (DTF) using a linear transducer in B-mode, or diaphragm excursion (DE) using a curvilinear transducer in M-mode. There are significant variations in imaging methodology and acquisition across all studies. Inter- and intrarater measurement reliabilities were generally excellent, with the highest reliability reported for DT (ICC, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99). Pooled data demonstrated acceptable to excellent accuracy for DT, DTF, and DE to predicting weaning outcome after 48 to 72 hours postextubation (DTF AUC, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.85). DT imaging was responsive to change over time. Only three eligible studies were available for intercostal muscles. Intercostal thickening fraction was shown to have excellent accuracy of predicting weaning outcome after 48-hour postextubation (AUC, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Diaphragm muscle ultrasound is reliable, valid, and responsive in ICU patients, but significant variation exists in the imaging acquisition and analysis methodologies. Future work should focus on developing standardized protocols for ultrasound imaging and consider further research into the role of intercostal muscle imaging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.082
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.207
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0820.207
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.032
Bibliometrics0.0100.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.638
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.076 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207