ArticleCureus2022
Disparities in Lung-Protective Ventilation in the United States.
Article in Cureus, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bench evidence, bedside uncertainty: hyperoxia, mechanical ventilation and lung injury.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Review
- Article
- Minimizing bias when using artificial intelligence in critical care medicine.Journal of critical care · 2024Article
- Disparities in Adult Patient Selection for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the United States: A Population-Level Study.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Article
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
Background The objective of our study was to determine whether disparities exist in the use of lung-protective ventilation for critically ill mechanically ventilated patients in the United States based on gender, race/ethnicity, or insurance status. Methods This was a secondary data analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort study conducted from 2010 to 2012. The outcome of interest was the proportion of patients receiving tidal volume > 8 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW). Results There were 1,595 patients in our primary analysis (710 women, 885 men). Women were more likely to receive tidal volumes > 8 mL/kg PBW than men (odds ratio [OR] = 3.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.67-4.40), a finding largely but not completely explained by gender differences in height. The underinsured were significantly more likely to receive tidal volume > 8 mL/kg PBW than the insured in multivariable analysis (OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.16-2.04). The prescription of > 8 mL/kg PBW tidal volume did not differ by racial or ethnic categories. Conclusions In this prospective nationwide cohort of critically ill mechanically ventilated patients, women and the underinsured were less likely than their comparators to receive lung-protective ventilation, with no apparent differences based on race/ethnicity alone.
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.