ArticleBMJ digital health & AI2025
Dual-phase machine learning framework for paediatric ventilator liberation: forecasting extubation readiness and nowcasting extubation outcomes.
Article in BMJ digital health & AI, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and validate a machine learning framework for predicting optimal extubation timing in paediatric intensive care units (PICUs), addressing the clinical need for continuous monitoring of weaning readiness and extubation safety. Methods and analysis: We developed a dual-phase machine learning framework using data from 3815 ventilation episodes across two UK PICUs. The framework includes (1) a Results: The forecasting model achieved an AUROC of 0.85 (95% CI 0.845 to 0.855) and the nowcasting model reached 0.77 (95% CI 0.760 to 0.780). Forecasting performance benefited from longer observation windows (up to 24 hours) and incorporated broader clinical factors (medications, patient characteristics), while nowcasting relied primarily on immediate ventilation parameters. The temporal evolution of risk scores differed markedly between the two models, with the nowcasting model erroneously signalling early readiness. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that distinct modelling strategies are needed to support different stages of ventilator liberation. The proposed dual-phase framework reflects the sequential nature of clinical decision-making and enables structured monitoring throughout the ventilator liberation process.This study represents the largest machine learning investigation of PICU ventilator liberation to date and demonstrates the feasibility of artificial intelligence-assisted extubation timing in paediatric critical care.
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.