Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29637078›Full record

ReviewERJ open research2018

Noninvasive ventilation in stable hypercapnic COPD: what is the evidence?

Marieke L Duiverman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ERJ open research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2023
    Review
  3. Ventilatory neural drive in chronically hypercapnic patients with COPD: effects of sleep and nocturnal noninvasive ventilation.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Mortality and Healthcare Use of Patients with Compensated Hypercapnia.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

1 author.

Marieke L DuivermanDept of Pulmonary Diseases/Home Mechanical Ventilation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Long-term noninvasive ventilation (NIV) to treat chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure is still controversial in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. However, with the introduction of high-intensity NIV, important benefits from this therapy have also been shown in COPD. In this review, the focus will be on the arguments for long-term NIV at home in patients with COPD. The rise of (high-intensity) NIV in COPD and the randomised controlled trials showing positive effects with this mode of ventilation will be discussed. Finally, the challenges that might be encountered (both in clinical practice and in research) in further optimising this therapy, monitoring and following patients, and selecting the patients who might benefit most will be reviewed.

Identifiers

PMID29637078
PMCPMC5890025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.