MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4318220560 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-28824-5

Clinical relevance of timing of assessment of ICU mortality in patients with moderate-to-severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

2023· article· en· W4318220560 on OpenAlexafffund
Jesús Villar, Jesús M. González‐Martín, José M. Añón, Carlos Ferrando, Juan A. Soler, Fernando Mosteiro, Juan M. Mora-Ordóñez, Alfonso Ambrós, Lorena Fernández de la Cruz, Raquel Montiel, Ánxela Vidal, Tomás Muñoz, Lina Pérez‐Méndez, Pedro Rodríguez, Cristina Fernández, Rosa L. Fernández, Tamás Szakmány, Karen E. A. Burns, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Arthur S. Slutsky

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityImpactSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundInstituto de Salud Carlos IIICanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsARDSMedicineObservational studyIntensive care unitSeverity of illnessIntensive care medicineDiscontinuationRandomized controlled trialMortality rateMechanical ventilationEmergency medicineInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mortality is a frequently reported outcome in clinical studies of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, timing of mortality assessment has not been well characterized. We aimed to identify a crossing-point between cumulative survival and death in the intensive care unit (ICU) of patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, beyond which the number of survivors would exceed the number of deaths. We hypothesized that this intersection would occur earlier in a successful clinical trial vs. observational studies of moderate/severe ARDS and predict treatment response. We conducted an ancillary study of 1580 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS managed with lung-protective ventilation to assess the relevance and timing of measuring ICU mortality rates at different time-points during ICU stay. First, we analyzed 1303 patients from four multicenter, observational cohorts enrolling consecutive patients with moderate/severe ARDS. We assessed cumulative ICU survival from the time of moderate/severe ARDS diagnosis to ventilatory support discontinuation within 7-days, 28-days, 60-days, and at ICU discharge. Then, we compared these findings to those of a successful randomized trial of 277 moderate/severe ARDS patients. In the observational cohorts, ICU mortality (487/1303, 37.4%) and 28-day mortality (425/1102, 38.6%) were similar (p = 0.549). Cumulative proportion of ICU survivors and non-survivors crossed at day-7; after day-7, the number of ICU survivors was progressively higher compared to non-survivors. Measures of oxygenation, lung mechanics, and severity scores were different between survivors and non-survivors at each point-in-time (p < 0.001). In the trial cohort, the cumulative proportion of survivors and non-survivors in the treatment group crossed before day-3 after diagnosis of moderate/severe ARDS. In clinical ARDS studies, 28-day mortality closely approximates and may be used as a surrogate for ICU mortality. For patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, ICU mortality assessment within the first week of a trial might be an early predictor of treatment response.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→