ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2026
Predictors of extubation success for premature infants.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to determine whether clinical variables predict the success of extubation for premature infants. STUDY
designUsing variables preceding 320 extubations of infants ≤30 weeks or ≤1250 g at birth, we built predictive models for success at 1-, 3-, and 7-days using machine learning algorithms. We also determined whether lung ultrasound (LUS) scores (n = 15) were associated with success, or predicted success, of extubation.
resultOf 84 factors considered, nine were associated with success at 1 day, seven at 3 days, and six at 7 days. The accuracies of the predictive models were 78-84%. Median LUS scores were significantly lower preceding successful extubations (at 3 days) but not correlated with the findings of the predictive models.
conclusionWe devised robust models for predicting extubation success based on clinical antecedents. Further study is needed to determine whether LUS can further improve prediction of extubation readiness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42342824What 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.