ArticleBMC emergency medicine2022
Effect of spontaneous breathing trial on extubation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease under mechanical ventilation.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory Rehabilitation and Decannulation in Adults with Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation After Tracheostomy: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Prediction of Spontaneous Breathing Trial Outcome in Critically Ill-Ventilated Patients Using Deep Learning: Development and Verification Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Author Reply "Comment on Prediction of Successful Spontaneous Breathing Trial and Extubation of Trachea by Lung Ultrasound in Mechanically Ventilated Patients in Intensive Care".Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate how spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) affects successful extubation and prognosis in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) patients under mechanical ventilation.
methodsAECOPD patients under invasive mechanical ventilation were recruited into the study and divided into the SBT and non-SBT groups. SBT patients received SBT for 60 min before extubation, while non-SBT patients that met weaning criteria were immediately extubated without SBT.
resultsA total of 64 patients were enrolled in analysis, including 32 in SBT group and 32 in non-SBT group. Patients in the two groups had similar baseline demographics and clinical characteristics (all parameters: p = > 0.05). Four (12.5%) patients in the SBT group and 5 (15.6%) in the non-SBT group were reintubated in 48 h of extubation (p = 0.821). During the 28-day follow-up after extubation, 3 patients died, 1 (3.1%) in the SBT group and 2 (6.3%) in the non-SBT group (p = 0.554).
conclusionOur findings indicate that SBT did not affect extubation success, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day survival in AECOPD patients under mechanical ventilation.
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.