MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411221391 · doi:10.1186/s13063-025-08838-2

Multi-center randomized superiority clinical trial in the early phase of mechanically ventilated patients to preserve diaphragm thickness using non-invasive magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation: STIMIT ACTIVATOR 1 pivotal trial

2025· article· en· W4411221391 on OpenAlexaffabout
Annia Schreiber, Carlés Subirá, Michael C. Sklar, Marlene Santos, Matthew Ko, Alessandro Panelli, Stefan J. Schaller, Danny Theodore, Daniel D Rowley, David Watson, Pramod Bonde, Elias N Baedorf Kassis, Daniel Talmor, Marco Ranieri, Ewan C. Goligher, Arthur S. Slutsky, Laurent Brochard

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialDiaphragm (acoustics)Phrenic nerveClinical trialAnesthesiaStimulationSurgeryInternal medicineRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction (VIDD) occurs in up to 60% of mechanically ventilated patients and prolongs ventilatory dependance. The consequences of VIDD are muscle atrophy, reduction of strength, and injury of muscle fibers. Atrophy and contractile activity of the diaphragm can be estimated by ultrasound muscle thickness and thickening fraction. Prior experience demonstrates invasive electrical stimulation of the diaphragm helps preserve muscle thickness. This is the first study on a non-invasive phrenic nerve stimulator that aims to assess its feasibility, safety, and usefulness in preserving diaphragm thickness. METHODS: A multi-center randomized clinical trial will be performed in four intensive care units (ICUs) in the United States of America and Canada. Inclusion criteria include patients older than 21 years, in the first 48 h of mechanical ventilation (MV) and predicted to remain on the ventilator for at least 48 h. Patients with contraindications for phrenic nerve stimulation, severe chronic pulmonary diseases, or impossibility to measure diaphragm thickness with ultrasound will be excluded. Patients enrolled will be randomized to standard care (control) or 30-min daily non-invasive phrenic nerve stimulation up to 10 days after enrollment (intervention). The primary effectiveness endpoint is the change in diaphragm thickness on day 10, extubation, or death whichever occurs first. Secondary endpoints include change in diaphragm thickness on day 4, maximal inspiratory pressure before extubation, and time-to rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) <105. Safety objectives include the proportion of device- or procedure-related adverse events (SAE). The estimated sample size will be 40 patients (20 per group). DISCUSSION: The STIMIT ACTIVATOR trial is a randomized multi-center study powered to elucidate whether non-invasive phrenic nerve stimulation is feasible, safe, and preserves diaphragm thickness. Meeting the primary endpoint will demonstrate its applicability in clinical practice to prevent diaphragmatic atrophy in ventilated patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05883163, August 29, 2023.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207