ArticleTrials2022
Effect of Automated Closed-loop ventilation versus convenTional VEntilation on duration and quality of ventilation in critically ill patients (ACTiVE) - study protocol of a randomized clinical trial.
Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04593810 (Effect of Automated Closed-Loop Ventilation Versus Conventional Ventilation on Duration and Quality of Ventilation), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Effect of Automated Closed-Loop Ventilation Versus Conventional Ventilation on Duration and Quality of Ventilation ('ACTiVE') - a Randomized Clinical Trial in Intensive Care Unit Patients
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of automated versus conventional ventilation on mechanical power of ventilation-A randomized crossover clinical trial.PloS one · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Bridging brain and lung: optimizing mechanical ventilation in acute brain injury.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025Review
- Liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation: a nationwide survey among intensive care units in the Netherlands.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Ventilator-Induced Lung Injury: The Unseen Challenge in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict Mechanical Ventilation Weaning Success in Patients with Respiratory Failure, Including Those with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundINTELLiVENT-Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a fully automated closed-loop mode of ventilation for use in critically ill patients. Evidence for benefit of INTELLiVENT-ASV in comparison to ventilation that is not fully automated with regard to duration of ventilation and quality of breathing is largely lacking. We test the hypothesis that INTELLiVENT-ASV shortens time spent on a ventilator and improves the quality of breathing.
methodsThe "Effects of Automated Closed-loop VenTilation versus Conventional Ventilation on Duration and Quality of Ventilation" (ACTiVE) study is an international, multicenter, two-group randomized clinical superiority trial. In total, 1200 intensive care unit (ICU) patients with an anticipated duration of ventilation of > 24 h will be randomly assigned to one of the two ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older at start of invasive ventilation in the ICU. Patients either receive automated ventilation by means of INTELLiVENT-ASV, or ventilation that is not automated by means of a conventional ventilation mode. The primary endpoint is the number of days free from ventilation and alive at day 28; secondary endpoints are quality of breathing using granular breath-by-breath analysis of ventilation parameters and variables in a time frame of 24 h early after the start of invasive ventilation, duration of ventilation in survivors, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality rates in the ICU and hospital, and at 28 and 90 days. DISCUSSION: ACTiVE is one of the first randomized clinical trials that is adequately powered to compare the effects of automated closed-loop ventilation versus conventional ventilation on duration of ventilation and quality of breathing in invasively ventilated critically ill patients. The results of ACTiVE will support intensivist in their choices regarding the use of automated ventilation.
trial registrationACTiVE is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (study identifier: NCT04593810 ) on 20 October 2020.
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.