ArticleChest2024
Differential Effect of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Strategies in Patients With ARDS: A Bayesian Analysis of Clinical Subphenotypes.
Article in Chest, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lung-Cardiovascular Interactions and Derangements in ARDS.Comprehensive physiology · 2026Review
- Machine learning in ARDS: an intensivist's guide to artificial intelligence applications.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Current Insights into Clinical, Molecular, and Therapeutic Approaches to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- ARDS Subphenotypes as a Guide to Therapy and Enrollment into Therapeutic Trials: Not So Fast.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Pathophysiological Insights, Subphenotypes, and Clinical Implications-A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Parsimonious Electronic Health Record-Based Models to Assign Subphenotypes in Children With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2025Article
- Sepsis subphenotypes, theragnostics and personalized sepsis care.Intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- A narrative review on the future of ARDS: evolving definitions, pathophysiology, and tailored management.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Clinical management of sepsis-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: current evidence and future directions.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundARDS is a heterogeneous condition with two subphenotypes identified by different methodologies. Our group similarly identified two ARDS subphenotypes using nine routinely available clinical variables. However, whether these are associated with differential response to treatment has yet to be explored. RESEARCH QUESTION: Are there differential responses to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) strategies on 28-day mortality according to subphenotypes in adult patients with ARDS? STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsWe evaluated data from two prior ARDS trials (Higher vs Lower Positive End-Expiratory Pressures in Patients With the ARDS [ALVEOLI] and the Alveolar Recruitment in ARDS Trial [ART]) that compared different PEEP strategies. We classified patients into one of two subphenotypes as described previously. We assessed the differential effect of PEEP with a Bayesian hierarchical logistic model for the primary outcome of 28-day mortality.
resultsWe analyzed data from 1,559 patients with ARDS. Compared with lower PEEP, a higher PEEP strategy resulted in higher 28-day mortality in patients with subphenotype A disease in the ALVEOLI study (OR, 1.61; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.90-2.94) and ART (OR, 1.73; 95% CrI, 1.01-2.98), with a probability of harm resulting from higher PEEP in this subphenotype of 94.3% and 97.7% in the ALVEOLI and ART studies, respectively. Higher PEEP was not associated with mortality in patients with subphenotype B disease in each trial (OR, 0.95 [95% CrI, 0.51-1.73] and 1.00 [95% CrI, 0.63-1.55], respectively), with probability of benefit of 56.4% and 50.7% in the ALVEOLI and ART studies, respectively. These effects were not modified by Pao
interpretationWe found evidence of differential response to PEEP strategies across two ARDS subphenotypes, suggesting possible harm with a higher PEEP strategy in one subphenotype. These observations may assist with predictive enrichment in future clinical trials.
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.