ArticleIntensive care medicine experimental2024
Estimation of normal lung weight index in healthy female domestic pigs.
Article in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards clinical translation of nanomedicines: Formulation scale-up and model systems.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung weight is an important study endpoint to assess lung edema in porcine experiments on acute respiratory distress syndrome and ventilatory induced lung injury. Evidence on the relationship between lung-body weight relationship is lacking in the literature. The aim of this work is to provide a reference equation between normal lung and body weight in female domestic piglets. MATERIALS AND
methods177 healthy female domestic piglets from previous studies were included in the analysis. Lung weight was assessed either via a CT-scan before any experimental injury or with a scale after autopsy. The animals were randomly divided in a training (n = 141) and a validation population (n = 36). The relation between body weight and lung weight index (lung weight/body weight, g/kg) was described by an exponential function on the training population. The equation was tested on the validation population. A Bland-Altman analysis was performed to compare the lung weight index in the validation population and its theoretical value calculated with the reference equation.
resultsA good fit was found between the validation population and the exponential equation extracted from the training population (RMSE = 0.060). The equation to determine lung weight index from body weight was: [Formula: see text] At the Bland and Altman analyses, the mean bias between the real and the expected lung weight index was - 0.26 g/kg (95% CI - 0.96-0.43), upper LOA 3.80 g/kg [95% CI 2.59-5.01], lower LOA - 4.33 g/kg [95% CI = - 5.54-(- 3.12)].
conclusionsThis exponential function might be a valuable tool to assess lung edema in experiments involving 16-50 kg female domestic piglets. The error that can be made due to the 95% confidence intervals of the formula is smaller than the one made considering the lung to body weight as a linear relationship.
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.