Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34641973›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2021

Predictive power of extubation failure diagnosed by cough strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jun Duan, Xiaofang Zhang, Jianping Song

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Observational
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jun Duan *Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Youyi Road 1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China. duanjun412589@163.com.ORCID 0000-0003-1685-0117
Xiaofang Zhang *Department of Geriatric Respiratory, People's Hospital of Wenjiang District, Kangtai Road 86, Wenjiang District, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, 611130, China.
Jianping SongDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Nancheng Road 301, Nan'an District, Chongqing, 400060, China. 125718258@qq.com.
The Affiliated Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe predictive power of extubation failure diagnosed by cough strength varies by study. Here we summarise the diagnostic power of extubation failure tested by cough strength.

methodsA comprehensive online search was performed to select potentially eligible studies that evaluated the predictive power of extubation failure tested by cough strength. A manual search was also performed to identify additional studies. Data were extracted to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to evaluate the predictive power of extubation failure.

resultsA total of 34 studies involving 45 study arms were enrolled, and 7329 patients involving 8684 tests were analysed. In all, 23 study arms involving 3018 tests measured cough peak flow before extubation. The pooled extubation failure was 36.2% and 6.3% in patients with weak and strong cough assessed by cough peak flow, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and AUC were 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.80), 0.75 (0.69-0.81), 2.89 (2.36-3.54), 0.37 (0.30-0.45), 8.91 (5.96-13.32), and 0.79 (0.75-0.82), respectively. Moreover, 22 study arms involving 5666 tests measured the semiquantitative cough strength score (SCSS) before extubation. The pooled extubation failure was 37.1% and 11.3%, respectively, in patients with weak and strong cough assessed by the SCSS. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and AUC were 0.53 (95% CI: 0.41-0.64), 0.83 (0.74-0.89), 2.50 (1.93-3.25), 0.65 (0.56-0.76), 4.61 (3.03-7.01), and 0.74 (0.70-0.78), respectively.

conclusionsWeak cough is associated with increased extubation failure. Cough peak flow is superior to the SCSS for predicting extubation failure. However, both show moderate power for predicting extubation failure.

Indexed as

Airway ExtubationCoughHumansTreatment FailureSensitivitySpecificityVentilator weaningWeak cough

Identifiers

PMID34641973
PMCPMC8513306
OpenAlexW3197316015

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.