Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41924166›Full record

ArticleInfection and drug resistance2026

Impact of Endotracheal Intubation Timing on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Severe Pneumonia: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.

Wen-Hui Bai, Li Cheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Wen-Hui BaiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Campus, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430200, People's Republic of China.
Li ChengDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Eastern Campus, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430200, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-3492-9574

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes between early (<24 hours) and delayed (≥24 hours) mechanical ventilation (MV) in adults with severe pneumonia. Methods: In this single-center, multi-ward retrospective cohort study, 827 adults with severe pneumonia requiring MV were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between January 2022 and December 2024. Patients were divided into an early MV group (<24 hours after ICU admission) and a delayed MV group (≥24 hours after ICU admission) according to the timing of endotracheal intubation. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline characteristics (age, PSI score, APACHE II score, comorbidities). The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included ICU length of stay, duration of MV, and incidence of related complications. Results: After PSM, 274 patients were included per group. Compared with the delayed MV, early MV was associated with significantly lower 28-day mortality (42.7% vs 51.8%; HR=0.735, 95% CI: 0.567-0.954; P=0.032), shorter ICU stay (11 vs 13 days; P=0.043), shorter MV duration (141 vs 145 h; P=0.018), and lower rates of tracheostomy at ICU discharge (30.7% vs 39.4%; P=0.032) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) requirement (23.4% vs 31.0%; P=0.044). In the unmatched cohort, cox regression showed that early MV was independently associated with lower ICU mortality (HR=0.767, 95% CI: 0.615-0.956; P=0.018). Conclusion: In critically ill patients with severe pneumonia receiving MV in the ICU, early initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation was associated with lower 28-day mortality.

Indexed as

endotracheal intubationmechanical ventilationmortalitypropensity score matchingsevere pneumoniatiming

Identifiers

PMID41924166
PMCPMC13037639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.