ReviewInternational journal of critical illness and injury science2013
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: When to hold the breath?
Review in International journal of critical illness and injury science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in Molecular Diagnosis of Nosocomial Pneumonia Classic PCR vs. Point-of-Care PCR: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Promoting subglottic secretion drainage: a quality improvement project in a UK critical care unit.BMJ open quality · 2021Review
- Is intra-abdominal hypertension a risk factor for ventilator-associated pneumonia?Annals of translational medicine · 2018Review
- Article
- Is survival improved by the use of NIV and PEG in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)? A post-mortem study of 80 ALS patients.PloS one · 2017Article
- Shock Management for Cardio-surgical Intensive Care Unit Patient: The Silver Days.Cardiac failure review · 2016Article
- Risk factors for mortality in patients with septic acute kidney injury in intensive care units in Beijing, China: a multicenter prospective observational study.BioMed research international · 2014Observational
- Ventilator-associated pneumonia.The Australasian medical journal · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most common infection in mechanically ventilated patients, and carries the highest mortality. An early diagnosis and definitive management not only reduces the overall mortality, but also brings down the burden of health care to the patient by reducing the cost, length of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and so on. Out of the various scoring systems, the Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS) calculation for VAP has a good sensitivity (72%) and specificity (85%) and the targeted antibiotic therapy in the appropriate dosage is found to be more beneficial than empirical treatment. Although controversies persist on several issues, preventive strategies like head elevation by 30 degrees, cuff pressure monitoring, avoidance of sedatives and muscle relaxants, and so on, have been found to reduce the occurrence of VAP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.