ArticleIntensive care medicine experimental2024
Lung- and diaphragm-protective strategies in acute respiratory failure: an in silico trial.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Silico Clinical Trials in Drug Development: Virtual Patients, Applications, and Regulatory Convergence.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Lung- and diaphragm-protective mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- A precision approach to translational research in acute lung injury.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2026Article
- Computational tools for personalizing treatment of acute respiratory failure, from machine learning to digital twins: a narrative review.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Monitoring diaphragmatic effort during diaphragm neurostimulation-assisted ventilation.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Transformer-based multimodal precision intervention model for enhancing diaphragm function in elderly patients.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung- and diaphragm-protective (LDP) ventilation may prevent diaphragm atrophy and patient self-inflicted lung injury in acute respiratory failure, but feasibility is uncertain. The objectives of this study were to estimate the proportion of patients achieving LDP targets in different modes of ventilation, and to identify predictors of need for extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO
methodsAn in silico clinical trial was conducted using a previously published mathematical model of patient-ventilator interaction in a simulated patient population (n = 5000) with clinically relevant physiological characteristics. Ventilation and sedation were titrated according to a pre-defined algorithm in pressure support ventilation (PSV) and proportional assist ventilation (PAV+) modes, with or without adjunctive ECCO
resultsAfter titration, the proportion of patients achieving targets was lower in PAV+ vs. PSV (37% vs. 43%, odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.73-0.85). Adjunctive ECCO
conclusionsIn this in silico trial, many patients required ECCO
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.