ArticleCritical care research and practice2023
Value of Diaphragm Ultrasonography for Extubation: A Single-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Critical care research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of competing endogenous RNA networks involved in phrenic nerve stimulation preventing mechanical ventilation induced diaphragm dysfunction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Clinical utility of diaphragmatic ultrasound for mechanical ventilator liberation in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of intensive care · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Daily evaluation of mechanically ventilated (MV) patients is essential for successful extubation. Proper withdrawal prevents complications and reduces the cost of hospitalization in the intensive care unit (ICU). Diaphragm ultrasonography (DUS) has emerged as a potential instrument for determining whether a patient is ready to be extubated. This study compared the efficacy rate of extubation using a standard withdrawal protocol and DUS in patients with MV. Methods: A randomized, parallel, single-blind, controlled study was conducted on ICU patients undergoing MV. Patients were randomly assigned to either the control (conventional weaning protocol) group or intervention (DUS-guided weaning) group in a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary outcome measure was the rate of reintubation and hospital mortality. Results: Forty patients were randomized to the trial. The mean age of the sample was 70 years, representing an older population. The extubation success rate was 90% in both groups. There was no reintubation in the first 48 hours and only two reintubations in both groups between the second and seventh days. The hospital mortality risk in patients with acute kidney injury was positively correlated with age and the need for hemodialysis.
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.