Observational studyThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2025
Epidemiology, Ventilation Management, and Outcomes in Invasively Ventilated Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: An Analysis of Four Observational Studies in Four Countries on Two Continents.
Observational study in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidemiology, ventilator management, and outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been described extensively but have never been compared between countries. We performed an individual patient data analysis of four observational studies to compare epidemiology, ventilator management, and outcomes. We used propensity score weighting to control for confounding factors. The analysis included 6,702 patients: 1,500 from Argentina, 844 from Brazil, 975 from the Netherlands, and 3,383 from Spain. There were substantial differences in baseline characteristics between countries. There were small differences in ventilation management. Intensive care unit mortality was higher in Argentina and Brazil compared with the Netherlands and Spain (59.6% and 56.6% versus 32.1% and 34.7%; P <0.001). The median number of days free from ventilation and alive at day 28 was equally low (0 [0-7], 0 [0-18], 1 [0-16], and 0 [0-16] days, respectively; P = 0.03), and the median number of days free from ventilation and alive at day 60 was higher in the Netherlands and Spain (0 [0-37], 0 [0-50], 33 [0-48], and 26 [0-48] days, respectively; P <0.001). Propensity score matching confirmed the outcome differences. Thus, the outcome of COVID-19 ARDS patients in Argentina and Brazil was substantially worse compared with that of patients in the Netherlands and Spain. It is unlikely that this results from differences in case mix or ventilation management.
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.