SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2023
Computational physiological models for individualised mechanical ventilation: a systematic literature review focussing on quality, availability, and clinical readiness.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Driving pressure-guided dynamic PEEP titration reduces atelectasis and improves oxygenation in pediatric laparoscopy: a randomized trial on personalized ventilation strategies.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Physiology-guided mechanical ventilation: Monitoring, proportional assist, and bounded automation.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Continuous and noninvasive respiratory effort monitoring: a narrative review of emerging techniques.Journal of intensive care · 2026Review
- Challenges in zero-flow blood pressure as a measure of mean circulatory filling pressure: Experimental and computational perspectives.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Effects of mechanical ventilation on the interstitial extracellular matrix in healthy lungs and lungs affected by acute respiratory distress syndrome: a narrative review.Critical care (London, England) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividualised optimisation of mechanical ventilation (MV) remains cumbersome in modern intensive care medicine. Computerised, model-based support systems could help in tailoring MV settings to the complex interactions between MV and the individual patient's pathophysiology. Therefore, we critically appraised the current literature on computational physiological models (CPMs) for individualised MV in the ICU with a focus on quality, availability, and clinical readiness.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted on 13 February 2023 in MEDLINE ALL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science to identify original research articles describing CPMs for individualised MV in the ICU. The modelled physiological phenomena, clinical applications, and level of readiness were extracted. The quality of model design reporting and validation was assessed based on American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) standards.
resultsOut of 6,333 unique publications, 149 publications were included. CPMs emerged since the 1970s with increasing levels of readiness. A total of 131 articles (88%) modelled lung mechanics, mainly for lung-protective ventilation. Gas exchange (n = 38, 26%) and gas homeostasis (n = 36, 24%) models had mainly applications in controlling oxygenation and ventilation. Respiratory muscle function models for diaphragm-protective ventilation emerged recently (n = 3, 2%). Three randomised controlled trials were initiated, applying the Beacon and CURE Soft models for gas exchange and PEEP optimisation. Overall, model design and quality were reported unsatisfactory in 93% and 21% of the articles, respectively.
conclusionCPMs are advancing towards clinical application as an explainable tool to optimise individualised MV. To promote clinical application, dedicated standards for quality assessment and model reporting are essential. Trial registration number PROSPERO- CRD42022301715 . Registered 05 February, 2022.
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.