Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35073928›Full record

ArticleBiomedical engineering online2022

Transparent decision support for mechanical ventilation using visualization of clinical preferences.

Stephen Edward Rees, Savino Spadaro, Francesca Dalla Corte, Nilanjan Dey, Jakob Bredal Brohus, Gaetano Scaramuzzo, David Lodahl, Robert Ravnholt Winding, Carlo Alberto Volta, Dan Stieper Karbing

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2022. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Trial
  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

10 authors.

Stephen Edward ReesRespiratory and Critical Care Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. sr@hst.aau.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4420-0605
Savino SpadaroDepartment of Morphology, Experimental Medicine and Surgery, Section of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Arcispedale Sant' Anna, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Francesca Dalla CorteDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center-IRCCS, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
Nilanjan DeyDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Regions Hospital Herning, Herning, Denmark.
Jakob Bredal BrohusMermaid Care A/S, Nørresundby, Denmark.
Gaetano ScaramuzzoDepartment of Morphology, Experimental Medicine and Surgery, Section of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Arcispedale Sant' Anna, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
David LodahlDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Robert Ravnholt WindingDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Regions Hospital Herning, Herning, Denmark.
Carlo Alberto VoltaDepartment of Morphology, Experimental Medicine and Surgery, Section of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Arcispedale Sant' Anna, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Dan Stieper KarbingRespiratory and Critical Care Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystems aiding in selecting the correct settings for mechanical ventilation should visualize patient information at an appropriate level of complexity, so as to reduce information overload and to make reasoning behind advice transparent. Metaphor graphics have been applied to this effect, but these have largely been used to display diagnostic and physiologic information, rather than the clinical decision at hand. This paper describes how the conflicting goals of mechanical ventilation can be visualized and applied in making decisions. Data from previous studies are analyzed to assess whether visual patterns exist which may be of use to the clinical decision maker. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe structure and screen visualizations of a commercial clinical decision support system (CDSS) are described, including the visualization of the conflicting goals of mechanical ventilation represented as a hexagon. Retrospective analysis is performed on 95 patients from 2 previous clinical studies applying the CDSS, to identify repeated patterns of hexagon symbols.

resultsVisual patterns were identified describing optimal ventilation, over and under ventilation and pressure support, and over oxygenation, with these patterns identified for both control and support modes of mechanical ventilation. Numerous clinical examples are presented for these patterns illustrating their potential interpretation at the bedside.

conclusionsVisual patterns can be identified which describe the trade-offs required in mechanical ventilation. These may have potential to reduce information overload and help in simple and rapid identification of sub-optimal settings.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalRespiration, ArtificialDecision MakingHumansPositive-Pressure RespirationRetrospective StudiesClinical decision supportClinical preferencesMechanical ventilation

Identifiers

PMID35073928
PMCPMC8785460

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.