ArticlePediatric research2023
Automated prediction of extubation success in extremely preterm infants: the APEX multicenter study.
Article in Pediatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- MetaboSense: An Integrated Quantum Dot-Mediated Aptamer Assay and Modular Microfluidic Platform for Continuous In-Line Monitoring of Lung Metabolism During Ex Vivo Perfusion.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Predictors of extubation success for premature infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Weight-adjusted rapid shallow breathing index during spontaneous breathing trial in mechanically ventilated preterm infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Superintelligence: A Crucial Juncture in the Development of Healthcare Sciences and Public Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- AI models in clinical neonatology: a review of modeling approaches and a consensus proposal for standardized reporting of model performance.Pediatric research · 2025Review
- Predictive model development for premature infant extubation outcomes: development and analysis.Pediatric research · 2025Article
- Neonatal respiratory care practice among level III and IV NICUs in New England.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Article
- Predicting Extubation Readiness in Preterm Infants Utilizing Machine Learning: A Diagnostic Utility Study.The Journal of pediatrics · 2024Observational
- Using machine-learning models to predict extubation failure in neonates with bronchopulmonary dysplasia.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- A clinical informatics approach to bronchopulmonary dysplasia: current barriers and future possibilities.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExtremely preterm infants are frequently subjected to mechanical ventilation. Current prediction tools of extubation success lacks accuracy.
methodsMulticenter study including infants with birth weight ≤1250 g undergoing their first extubation attempt. Clinical data and cardiorespiratory signals were acquired before extubation. Primary outcome was prediction of extubation success. Automated analysis of cardiorespiratory signals, development of clinical and cardiorespiratory features, and a 2-stage Clinical Decision-Balanced Random Forest classifier were used. A leave-one-out cross-validation was done. Performance was analyzed by ROC curves and determined by balanced accuracy. An exploratory analysis was performed for extubations before 7 days of age.
resultsA total of 241 infants were included and 44 failed (18%) extubation. The classifier had a balanced accuracy of 73% (sensitivity 70% [95% CI: 63%, 76%], specificity 75% [95% CI: 62%, 88%]). As an additional clinical-decision tool, the classifier would have led to an increase in extubation success from 82% to 93% but misclassified 60 infants who would have been successfully extubated. In infants extubated before 7 days of age, the classifier identified 16/18 failures (specificity 89%) and 73/105 infants with success (sensitivity 70%).
conclusionsMachine learning algorithms may improve a balanced prediction of extubation outcomes, but further refinement and validation is required. IMPACT: A machine learning-derived predictive model combining clinical data with automated analyses of individual cardiorespiratory signals may improve the prediction of successful extubation and identify infants at higher risk of failure with a good balanced accuracy. Such multidisciplinary approach including medicine, biomedical engineering and computer science is a step forward as current tools investigated to predict extubation outcomes lack sufficient balanced accuracy to justify their use in future trials or clinical practice. Thus, this individualized assessment can optimize patient selection for future trials of extubation readiness by decreasing exposure of low-risk infants to interventions and maximize the benefits of those at high risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35906315What 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.