ArticleJournal of critical care2018
Acute respiratory distress syndrome without identifiable risk factors: A secondary analysis of the ARDS network trials.
Article in Journal of critical care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05150483 (EndotyPIng PreHospitAl de Novo Acute hYpoxemic Respiratory Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
EndotyPIng PreHospitAl de Novo Acute hYpoxemic Respiratory Failure
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Trial
- The utility of angiopoietin-2 and blood cell-derived biomarker indices in differentiating rapidly improving acute respiratory distress syndrome (RIARDS) phenotype from persistent-ARDS: a prospective observational study.Annals of medicine · 2025Observational
- Rapidly improving ARDS differs clinically and biologically from persistent ARDS.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Observational
- Association Between Vaccination Status and Mortality Among Intubated Patients With COVID-19-Related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Rapidly improving acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19: a multi-centre observational study.Respiratory research · 2022Observational
- Persistent severe acute respiratory distress syndrome for the prognostic enrichment of trials.PloS one · 2020Article
- Biomarker profiles of coagulopathy and alveolar epithelial injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome with idiopathic/immune-related disease or common direct risk factors.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe examined whether patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) lacking risk factors are enrolled in therapeutic trials and assessed their clinical characteristics and outcomes.
methodsWe performed a secondary analysis of patient-level data pooled from the ARMA, ALVEOLI, FACTT, ALTA and EDEN ARDSNet randomized controlled trials obtained from the Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. We compared baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes (before and after adjustment using Poisson regression model) of ARDS patients with versus without risk factors.
resultsOf 3733 patients with ARDS, 81 (2.2%) did not have an identifiable risk factor. Patients without risk factors were younger, had lower baseline severity of illness, were more likely to have the ARDS resolve rapidly (i.e., within 24 h) (p < 0.001) and they had more ventilator-free days (median 21; p = 0.003), more intensive care unit-free days (18; p = 0.010), and more non-pulmonary organ failure-free days (24; p < 0.001) than comparators (17, 14 and 18, respectively). Differences persisted after adjustment for potential confounders.
conclusionsPatients with ARDS without identifiable risk factors are enrolled in therapeutic trials and may have better outcomes, including a higher proportion of rapidly resolving ARDS, than those with risk factors.
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.