Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31655511›Full record

Observational studyTurkish journal of medical sciences2019

Can we predict patients that will not benefit from invasive mechanical ventilation? A novel scoring system in intensive care: the IMV Mortality Prediction Score (IMPRES)

Tevfik Özlü, Mehtap Pehlivanlar Küçük, Akin Kaya, Esra Yarar, Sami Cenk Kirakli, Özlem Şengören Dikiş, Hale Kefeli Çelik, Serdar Özkan, Hayriye Bektaş Aksoy, Ahmet Oğuzhan Küçük and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Mehtap Pehlivanlar KüçükORCID 0000-0003-2247-4074
Sami Cenk KirakliORCID 0000-0001-6013-7330
Özlem Şengören DikişORCID 0000-0001-7005-3333
Hale Kefeli ÇelikORCID 0000-0002-0850-4524
Hayriye Bektaş AksoyORCID 0000-0002-4390-5198
Ahmet Oğuzhan KüçükORCID 0000-0002-6993-0519
IMVICAP Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aim: The present study aimed to define the clinical and laboratory criteria for predicting patients that will not benefit from invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) treatment and determine the prediction of mortality and prognosis of these critical ill patients. Materials and methods: The study was designed as an observational, multicenter, prospective, and cross-sectional clinical study. It was conducted by 75 researchers at 41 centers in intensive care units (ICUs) located in various geographical areas of Turkey. It included a total of 1463 ICU patients who were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) treatment. A total of 158 parameters were examined via logistic regression analysis to identify independent risk factors for mortality; using these data, the IMV Mortality Prediction Score (IMPRES) scoring system was developed. Results: The following cut-off scores were used to indicate mortality risk: <2, low risk; 2–5, moderate risk; 5.1–8, high risk; >8, very high risk. There was a 26.8% mortality rate among the 254 patients who had a total IMPRES score of lower than 2. The mortality rate was 93.3% for patients with total IMPRES scores of greater than 8 (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The present study included a large number of patients from various geographical areas of the country who were admitted to various types of ICUs, had diverse diagnoses and comorbidities, were intubated with various indications in either urgent or elective settings, and were followed by physicians from various specialties. Therefore, our data are more general and can be applied to a broader population. This study devised a new scoring system for decision-making for critically ill patients as to whether they need to be intubated or not and presents a rapid and accurate prediction of mortality and prognosis prior to ICU admission using simple clinical data.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCritical CareCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRespiration, ArtificialRisk FactorsSeverity of Illness IndexTurkeyCritical careethicsintubationinvasive mechanical ventilationpredictionscoring systems

Identifiers

PMID31655511
PMCPMC7518657
OpenAlexW3013601406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.