ArticleScientific reports2020
Development and validation of a sample entropy-based method to identify complex patient-ventilator interactions during mechanical ventilation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- ReSurfEMG: A Python Package for Comprehensive Analysis of Respiratory Surface EMG.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Electromyographic Diaphragm and Electrocardiographic Signal Analysis for Weaning Outcome Classification in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Developing a machine-learning model for real-time prediction of successful extubation in mechanically ventilated patients using time-series ventilator-derived parameters.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Cardiopulmonary coupling indices to assess weaning readiness from mechanical ventilation.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-ventilator asynchronies can be detected by close monitoring of ventilator screens by clinicians or through automated algorithms. However, detecting complex patient-ventilator interactions (CP-VI), consisting of changes in the respiratory rate and/or clusters of asynchronies, is a challenge. Sample Entropy (SE) of airway flow (SE-Flow) and airway pressure (SE-Paw) waveforms obtained from 27 critically ill patients was used to develop and validate an automated algorithm for detecting CP-VI. The algorithm's performance was compared versus the gold standard (the ventilator's waveform recordings for CP-VI were scored visually by three experts; Fleiss' kappa = 0.90 (0.87-0.93)). A repeated holdout cross-validation procedure using the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) as a measure of effectiveness was used for optimization of different combinations of SE settings (embedding dimension, m, and tolerance value, r), derived SE features (mean and maximum values), and the thresholds of change (Th) from patient's own baseline SE value. The most accurate results were obtained using the maximum values of SE-Flow (m = 2, r = 0.2, Th = 25%) and SE-Paw (m = 4, r = 0.2, Th = 30%) which report MCCs of 0.85 (0.78-0.86) and 0.78 (0.78-0.85), and accuracies of 0.93 (0.89-0.93) and 0.89 (0.89-0.93), respectively. This approach promises an improvement in the accurate detection of CP-VI, and future study of their clinical implications.
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.