Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42245933›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026

Predicting failure of extubation and non-invasive respiratory support in critically ill patients: clinical complexity, limitations of traditional indices, and machine learning perspectives.

Salvatore Notaro, Roberto Giurazza, Andrea Imparato, Fabrizio Falso, Salvatore Virno, Teresa Pasqualina Iovino, Marco Caiazzo, Ludovica Golino, Gianmarco Russo, Emilio Di Costanzo and 8 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in medicine, 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

18 authors.

Salvatore Notaro *Unit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Roberto GiurazzaUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Andrea ImparatoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Fabrizio FalsoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Salvatore VirnoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Teresa Pasqualina IovinoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Marco CaiazzoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Ludovica GolinoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Gianmarco RussoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Emilio Di CostanzoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Massimiliano BarberioUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Marcello SorrentinoIntensive Care Unit, Buon Consiglio Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Naples, Italy.
Giuseppe FiorentinoUnit of Respiratory Pathophysiology, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Giuseppe La CerraUnit of Interventional Pulmonology, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Clelia EspositoUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Antonio CorcioneUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.
Antonio M EsquinasIntensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Eugenio PiscitelliUnit of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Postoperative Intensive Care, Department of Critical Care, AORN Ospedali dei Colli, Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Failure of non-invasive respiratory support represents a major and unresolved clinical challenge in critically ill patients, both after extubation and during non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen therapy used as primary treatment. Delayed or inappropriate escalation to invasive mechanical ventilation is associated with adverse outcomes, underscoring the need for reliable tools to timely identify patients at risk of failure. Traditional bedside indices provide simplicity and immediate applicability but show limited predictive accuracy and poor generalizability across heterogeneous clinical settings. In recent years, predictive models based on machine learning have been developed to improve risk stratification by integrating multiple clinical and physiological variables. Although early models demonstrated improved discrimination compared with conventional indices, their clinical impact has been constrained by retrospective designs, heterogeneous outcome definitions, limited external validation, and poor interpretability-limitations that collectively prevent meaningful cross-study comparisons and hinder safe clinical translation. More recent approaches have shifted toward dynamic and time-dependent models that incorporate early physiological trajectories and treatment response, offering predictions that are more consistent with real-world clinical decision-making processes. Nevertheless, high predictive accuracy alone does not ensure clinical usefulness in the absence of transparent decision support and integration into clinical workflows. Overall, current evidence suggests that predictive models should not replace clinical judgment but rather support timely, contextualized decisions by identifying modifiable risks. Future research should prioritize standardized outcome definitions, prospective multicenter validation, and the development of interpretable, workflow-integrated tools to enable safe and effective clinical translation.

Indexed as

clinical decision supportextubation failureintensive caremachine learningnon-invasive respiratory supportnon-invasive ventilationrisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID42245933
PMCPMC13229892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.