ArticleRespiratory care2023
Bench Study of a Spontaneous Breathing Trial with Different Modalities.
Article in Respiratory care, 2023. 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.
- Physiological comparison of high-flow oxygen via endotracheal tube and T-piece strategies during spontaneous breathing trials: a randomized crossover study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Comparative evaluation of spontaneous breathing trial techniques for ventilator weaning: a bench study.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Article
- Advanced Concepts for Improving Simulation-Based Studies of Ventilatory Mechanics.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Response to: Advanced Concepts for Improving Simulation-based Studies of Ventilatory Mechanics.Respiratory care · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) is the final step of weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation. An SBT is aimed at predicting work of breathing (WOB) after extubation and, most importantly, a patient's eligibility for extubation. The optimal SBT modality remains debated. A high-flow oxygen (HFO) has been tested during SBT in clinical study only, which is why no definite conclusion can be drawn on its physiologic effects on the endotracheal tube. Our objective was to assess, on a bench, inspiratory tidal volume (V
methodsA test lung model was set with 3 conditions of resistance and linear compliance, 3 inspiratory efforts (low, normal, and high), each at 2 breathing frequencies (low and high for 20 and 30 breaths/min, respectively). Pairwise comparisons and a quasi-Poisson generalized linear model that compared SBT modalities were performed.
resultsInspiratory V
conclusionsWith the same effort intensity and breathing frequency, inspiratory V
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.