Cuff leak test and airway obstruction in mechanically ventilated ICU patients (COSMIC): a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The cuff leak test (CLT) is hypothesised to help optimise extubation by assessing for laryngeal oedema which, if unrecognised and untreated, could lead to post-extubation stridor, post-extubation airway obstruction, and reintubation. However, the diagnostic accuracy of the CLT to detect post-extubation stridor (and hence potentially airway obstruction) remains uncertain. Given the equipoise that exists surrounding the CLT, we are conducting a pilot randomised clinical trial (RCT) examining the CLT as part of the pathway to extubation. Herein, we report the protocol for the C uff Leak Test and Airway O b s truction in M echanically Ventilated IC U Patients (COSMIC): a Pilot Feasibility Randomized Clinical trial (RCT). Methods and analysis This is a multicentre, international, parallel-group, pragmatic, pilot RCT. We will enrol 100 mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) who are deemed ready for extubation and have at least one risk factor for laryngeal oedema. In the intervention arm, respiratory therapists will perform a qualitative CLT before extubation. If a patient passes the CLT (suggesting no laryngeal oedema), extubation will be performed in keeping with standard care. If the patient fails the CLT (suggesting laryngeal oedema), extubation will be delayed allowing for administration of dexamethasone, consideration of diuresis, and the CLT will be repeated in 12–24 hours. In the control arm, patients will be extubated without completing a CLT, without steroid administration, and without delay. Randomization will be by a 1:1 allocation, stratified by centre. The primary feasibility outcomes will include recruitment and protocol adherence. Secondary outcomes will include post-extubation stridor, reintubation within 72 hours, emergency surgical airway within 72 hours, and ICU and hospital mortality within 30 days. Ethics and dissemination This trial has been approved by Clinical Trials Ontario, Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board, State of Kuwait Ministry of Health, University of Texas Health Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects and Brant Community Health Systems Research Ethics Committee. The trial has received a No Objection Letter from Health Canada. Trial results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number NCT05456542 .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".