ReviewZhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics2019
[Research advances in validity of predictors for extubation outcome in children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation].
Review in Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Prospects and developments in the technologies of high frequency oscillatory ventilation].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of invasive mechanical ventilation technology provides effective respiratory support for critically ill children. However, respiratory support is not the end of treatment as the ultimate goal is successful extubation in children. At present, some evaluation indicators before extubation including rapid shallow breathing index, maximal inspiratory pressure, and work of breathing are of high clinical value in predicting adult extubation outcome, but their evidence of evidence-based medicine is not sufficient in the field of pediatric intensive care. This paper reviews the current research on the validity of predictors for extubation outcomes in children. It shows that there is still a lack of indicators with good sensitivity and specificity for assessment before extubation in children. The studies are still in a small-sample size and single-center stage. Therefore, how to optimize evaluation before extubation and improve the success rate of extubation is the direction of joint efforts of doctors in the pediatric intensive care unit and rehabilitation medicine department.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31315777PMC7389097What 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.