MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414853442 · doi:10.1186/s12890-025-03932-2

Risk factors and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4414853442 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alejandro Mendoza, Daniel Molano-Franco, Joan Ramón Masclans, Henry Mauricio Parada-Gereda

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pulmonary Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNosocomial Infections in ICU
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunnel plotMeta-analysisOdds ratioSystematic reviewMEDLINEConfidence intervalIntensive care unitPublication biasPneumonia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common complication in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, which increases morbidity rates and adversely affects outcomes. The associated risk factors and outcomes remain controversial. The aim of the present study is to explore the risk factors and clinical outcomes of patients with VAP. METHODS: Two investigators conducted independent systematic Literature searches of Pubmed, Cochrane Database, Scopus, Medline, Science Direct and Epistemonikos databases published from inception to November 2024. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess study quality. A meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects Model. The systematic review protocol was registered in the CRDdatabase 42024538138 of the Prospective International Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). A subgroup analysis, bivariate meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and Egger's test. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 16,731 patients. Male gender odds ratio (OR) 1.30 (95% Confidence interval (CI) 1.18-1.44) p<0.05; the use of H2 blockers OR 2.24 (95% CI 1.50-3.37) p<0.05; tracheostomy OR 3.44 (95% CI 2.0-5.92) p<0.05; prior antibiotic treatment OR 1.52 (95% CI 1.08-2.15) p<0.05; reintubation OR 5.11 (95% CI 2.29-11.42) p<0.05; enteral feeding OR 4.73 (95% CI 2.54-8.78) p<0.05; Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) OR 1.52 (95% CI 1.10-2.09) p<0.05; impaired consciousness at hospital admission OR 3.14 (95% CI 1.28-7.69) p<0.05; nasogastric tube OR 2.94 (95% CI 1.56-5.53) p<0.05; use of neuromuscular blockers OR 1.30 (95% CI 1.13-1.49) p<0.05; trauma OR 1.47 (95% CI 1.12-1.93) p<0.05, and days of intubation prior to VAP OR 6.2 (95% CI 1.09-11.3). A p<0.05 significantly increased the risk of VAP. In patients with VAP, the average ICU stay was 12.7 days longer (95% CI: 9.6-15.8) p<0.05; the duration of mechanical ventilation was 12.3 days longer (95% CI: 9.27-15.34) p <0.05; the hospital stay was 16.1 days longer (95% CI: 10.8-21.5) p <0.05. The certainty of the evidence was low for most outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Male gender, use of H2 blockers, tracheostomy, prior antibiotic treatment, reintubation, enteral feeding, COPD, impaired consciousness at hospital admission, nasogastric tube, use of neuromuscular blockers, trauma and days of intubation prior to VAP significantly increased the risk of VAP. In patients with VAP, ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and hospital stay presented significant increases.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pulmonary MedicineSame topicNosocomial Infections in ICUFrench-language works237,207