MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403862109 · doi:10.4187/respcare.12285

Respiratory Oscillometry in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

2024· article· en· W4403862109 on OpenAlexaff
Dmitry Ponomarev, Joyce Wu, Zoltán Hantos, Chung‐Wai Chow, Ewan Goligher

Bibliographic record

VenueRespiratory Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRespiratory systemAcute respiratory failureIntensive care medicineRespiratory failureCardiologyInternal medicineMechanical ventilation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Assessing respiratory mechanics in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure who are not intubated could provide useful information about illness trajectory. Oscillometry is a respiratory function test used to measure total respiratory impedance during tidal breathing, which reveals resistive and elastic properties of the lung. This study assessed the feasibility of oscillometry in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and described their respiratory mechanics. Methods: Adult participants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure who were receiving noninvasive respiratory support with <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mtext>F</mml:mtext> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mtext>IO</mml:mtext> </mml:mrow> <mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ≥0.4 and flow ≥6 L/min underwent oscillometry at baseline and after resolution of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The primary end point was the number of participants who completed the baseline measurement. The feasibility criterion was in obtaining baseline oscillometry measurements in ≥80% of enrolled participants. Results: Of 183 patients screened between July 2022 and August 2023, 29% were unable to cooperate due to altered mental state, 20% with extreme hypoxemia were excluded because of clinical instability, and 12% declined participation. Of the 10 participants (5.4%) recruited, all tolerated oscillometry measurements. At baseline, the median (minimum, maximum) <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mtext>F</mml:mtext> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mtext>IO</mml:mtext> </mml:mrow> <mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> was 0.8 (0.4, 0.8), median oxygen saturation of 94% dropped to a nadir of 82% at the end of oscillometry and recovered within 2 min. Lung reactance was increased, with a reactance area of 25 (15–32) cm H 2 O/L. Hypoxemia resolved in 9 participants. After resolution of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in 8 (6–16) d, the median reactance area dropped to 15 (14–19) cm H 2 O/L. Conclusions: Respiratory mechanics in the participants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure who were not intubated could be assessed by oscillometry in carefully selected cases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespiratory CareSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207