ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Comparing the predicted accuracy of PO
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the predicted accuracy of PFR with RSBI for successful spontaneous breathing trial before extubation in intensive care unit.
methodsThis cross sectional study was conducted at the ICU of Ch. Pervaiz Ellahi Institute of Cardiology, Multan Medical and Nishtar Medical University Hospital from July, 2017 to January, 2019.PO
resultsRSBI threshold of 130 had 40.4% sensitivity, 51.1% specificity, 55.2% positive predictive value, 36.4% negative predictive value and 44.7% diagnostic accuracy while RSBI threshold of 105 had 94.1% sensitivity, 43.6% specificity, 71.4% positive predictive value, 83.2% negative predictive value and 73.8% diagnostic accuracy. pO
conclusionEven though neither rapid shallow breathing nor the PFR was enough accurate in prediction of successful extubation but rapid shallow breathing index 105 threshold had higher sensitivity and specificity as compared to RSBI threshold 130PFR. Therefore, RSBI105 is more accurate in predicting the outcome of extubation of ICU patients.
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.