Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32706740›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2020

An Evaluation of Agreement of Breathing Rates Measured by a Novel Device, Manual Counting, and Other Techniques Used in Clinical Practice: Protocol for the Observational VENTILATE Study.

Matthew T Jones, Emily Heiden, Carole Fogg, Paul Meredith, Gary Smith, Nicola Sayer, Lisa Toft, Emma Williams, Matthew Williams, Thomas Brown and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

20 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew T JonesDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6530-764X
Emily HeidenDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4997-065X
Carole FoggDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3000-6185
Paul MeredithDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5464-371X
Gary SmithDepartment of Nursing, University of Bournemouth, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2070-8455
Nicola SayerPortsmouth Hospitals Simulation Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8395-6179
Lisa ToftPortsmouth Hospitals Simulation Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0641-1954
Emma WilliamsPortsmouth Hospitals Simulation Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1924-0066
Matthew WilliamsPortsmouth Hospitals Simulation Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8102-6306
Thomas BrownDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7336-4719
Jessica GatesDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7777-0201
David LodgeDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3762-0284
Paul BassettStats Consultancy Ltd, Amersham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7830-4563
Mark AmosDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7341-5264
Milan ChauhanDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6242-4587
Selina BegumDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8564-0987
Madeleine RasonDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2619-9615
Jonathan WinterDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7304-291X
Jayne LongstaffDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0570-208X
Anoop J ChauhanDepartment of Respiratory Research and Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4044-6114
Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust · GBBournemouth University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRespiratory rate (RR) is the most sensitive physiological observation to predict clinical deterioration on hospital wards, and poor clinical monitoring has been highlighted as a primary contributor to avoidable mortality. Patients in intensive care have their RR monitored continuously, but this equipment is rarely available on general hospital wards.

objectiveThe primary objective is to assess the accuracy of the RespiraSense device in comparison with other methods currently used in clinical practice. The secondary objective is to assess the accuracy of the RespiraSense device in participants in different positions and when reading aloud.

methodsA single-center, prospective observational study will investigate the agreement of the RespiraSense device as compared with other device measurements (capnography, electrocardiogram) and the current standard measurement of RR (manual counting by a trained health care professional). The different methods will be employed concurrently on the same participant as part of a single study visit.

resultsRecruitment to this study has not yet started as funding decisions are still pending. Therefore, results are not available at this stage. It is anticipated that the data required could be collected within 2 months of first recruitment to the study and data analysis completed within 6 months of the study start date.

conclusionsThe Evaluation of Agreement of Breathing Rates Measured by a Novel Device, Manual Counting, and Other Techniques Used in Clinical Practice (VENTILATE) study will provide further validation of the use of the RespiraSense device in subjects with abnormal respiratory rates. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/15437.

Indexed as

bradypnoeadevicemedicalmonitoringpiezoelectricrespirationrespiratoryrespiratory function teststachypnoeatelemetryvital signs

Identifiers

PMID32706740
PMCPMC7399957
OpenAlexW2972455373

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.