ArticleDigital health
Construction and evaluation of acquired weakness nomogram model in patients with mechanical ventilation in intensive care unit.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Integrating sarcopenia into ICU-acquired weakness risk stratification: a machine learning-based prediction model for critical care.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Article
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
Objective: The incidence of intensive care unit acquired weakness (ICU-AW) has shown an increasing trend with still a lack of effective treatment options. The early assessment of the risk of developing ICU-AW can provide patients with targeted interventions. This study aimed to determine the independent risk factors of ICU-AW in patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) and develop a nomogram and verify its predictive efficacy. Methods: This observational study included patients receiving MV therapy in the ICU of our hospital between January 2020 and January 2023. They were divided into the ICU-AW and non-ICU-AW groups. The training cohort (n = 264) and the validation cohort (n = 143) were constructed. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to select the risk factors, and a nomogram model was established. Calibration, receiver operating characteristic (ROC), and decision curves were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the model. Results: The MV duration (OR = 1.24, 95%CI[1.11, 1.38]), APACHE II score (OR = 1.34, 95%CI[1.20, 1.50]), SOFA score (OR = 1.36, 95%CI[1.21, 1.53]), age (OR = 1.05, 95%CI[1.00, 1.10]), nerve blockers (OR = 3.26, 95%CI[1.34, 7.92]), and diabetes mellitus (OR = 3.12, 95%CI[1.10, 8.87]) were independent risk factors for ICU-AW. The nomogram had good predictive efficacy for both the training (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.950, 95%CI [0.93, 0.97]) and validation cohorts (AUC = 0.823, 95%CI [0.75, 0.89]). Conclusion: The MV duration, APACHE II, SOFA, age, use of nerve blockers, and diabetes mellitus are independent risk factors for ICU-AW. The nomogram model based on them had good predictive efficacy and may be clinically useful.
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.