ArticleTranslational pediatrics2022
A learning curve of a novel multimodal endotracheal intubation assistant device for novices in a simulated airway: a prospective manikin trial with cumulative sum method.
Article in Translational pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of an artificial intelligence-based airway identification system in tracheal intubation.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Awake fiberoptic intubation is conventionally performed in anticipated difficult airways. However, obstruction by secretions and sputum makes it challenging for novices. A prototype of a novel multimodal endotracheal intubation assistant device (MEIAD) was developed for an indication of airway according to end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO Methods: A total of 16 novice residents with less than 2-year clinical experience were enrolled. After instruction, each individual exercised 40 insertions with MEIAD on a difficult airway simulation. Insertion success (defined as a visualization of the carina within 120 seconds), insertion time (the time from when the guiding scope entered the nasal cavity to the carina was visible), and self-confidence score (subjective score with a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10) were recorded. The acceptable and unacceptable failure rates of CUSUM were set as 15% and 30%, respectively. The exercises were divided into 2 phases (phase 1: 1-20, phase 2: 21-40) for further evaluation. All continuous data were expressed by median (IQR, interquartile ranges) and analyzed using Mann-Whitney test. All categorical variables were expressed as percentages and compared by the χ Results: Among the 16 residents, 15 were able to cross the lower decision boundary in an average of 21.27±9.51 attempts using the novel device. The insertion time [24.0 (17.0-42.0) Conclusions: MEIAD showed a satisfactory learning curve and efficacy on the manikin for novices. However, as a small exploratory manikin trial, the results cannot be replicated in clinical practice. MEIAD is expected to be further improved and potential to be an alternative device for difficult airways.
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.