ArticleERJ open research2025
Utility of
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. 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.
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
Background: Aspiration pneumonia is a critical concern, particularly in older adults with comorbidities. Micro-aspiration is often underdiagnosed due to the lack of precise diagnostic tools. This study evaluated the utility of anaerobic PCR for Methods: This prospective observational case-control study included patients with new-onset acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation in intensive care units (ICUs) at a Taiwan medical centre (2022-2024). Demographic data, laboratory results and tracheal aspirates were collected within 48 h of ICU admission. PCR results for Results: Among 87 patients (53 with aspiration pneumonia, 34 without), aspiration pneumonia primarily affected the right side and had atypical phenotypes. Demographics, traditional risk factors, comorbidities and disease severity were similar between groups. Conclusions:
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.