Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26904266›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2016

Update on clinical trials in home mechanical ventilation.

Luke E Hodgson, Patrick B Murphy

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luke E Hodgson1 Lane Fox Respiratory Unit, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK ; 2 Division of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology, King's College London, London, UK ; 3 Lane Fox Clinical Respiratory Physiology Research Centre, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Patrick B Murphy1 Lane Fox Respiratory Unit, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK ; 2 Division of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology, King's College London, London, UK ; 3 Lane Fox Clinical Respiratory Physiology Research Centre, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Home mechanical ventilation (HMV) is an increasingly common intervention and is initiated for a range of pathological processes, including neuromuscular disease (NMD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and obesity related respiratory failure. There have been important recent data published in this area, which helps to guide practice by indicating which populations may benefit from this intervention and the optimum method of setting up and controlling sleep disordered breathing. Recent superficially conflicting data has been published regarding HMV in COPD, with a trial in post-exacerbation patients suggesting no benefit, but in stable chronic hypercapnic patients suggesting a clear and sustained mortality benefit. The two studies are critiqued and the potential reasons for the differing results are discussed. Early and small trial data is frequently contradicted with larger randomised controlled trials and this has been the case with diaphragm pacing being shown to be potentially harmful in the latest data, confirming the importance of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in NMD such as motor neurone disease. Advances in ventilator technology have so far appeared quicker than the clinical data to support their use; although small and often unblinded, the current data suggests equivalence to standard modes of NIV, but with potential comfort benefits that may enhance adherence. The indications for NIV have expanded since its inception, with an effort to treat sleep disordered breathing as a result of chronic heart failure (HF). The SERVE-HF trial has recently demonstrated no clear advantage to this technology and furthermore detected a potentially deleterious effect, with a worsening of all cause and cardiovascular mortality in the treated group compared to controls. The review serves to provide the reader with a critical review of recent advances in the field of sleep disordered breathing and HMV.

Indexed as

chronic respiratory failureNon-invasive ventilation (NIV)sleep disordered breathing

Identifiers

PMID26904266
PMCPMC4739968
OpenAlexW2269228073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.