ArticleCureus2026
Derivation and Exploratory Evaluation of the Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation (ROX) Index as a Predictor of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHigh-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is a first-line respiratory support modality for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) due to COVID-19 pneumonia. The respiratory rate-oxygenation (ROX) index, defined as the ratio of peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO
methodsThis single-center prospective observational cohort study included 60 consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring HFNC therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) from March 2021 to February 2022. The study was conducted at Medanta, Ranchi, India. The ROX index was measured at 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours after HFNC initiation. HFNC failure was defined as the subsequent requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) within the index ICU admission. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with optimal cut-off determined by the Youden index, and univariate logistic regression were used to assess predictive accuracy.
resultsOf 60 patients enrolled, 37/60 (61.7%) achieved HFNC success, and 23/60 (38.3%) experienced HFNC failure. The ROX index was significantly higher in the success group at all measured time points (P<0.001). The ROX index at 12 hours was the best predictor of HFNC outcome (area under the curve (AUC)=0.973, sensitivity 36/37 (97.3%), specificity 19/23 (82.6%), cut-off value 5.81). These performance estimates were derived and evaluated in the same 60-patient cohort and should be considered optimistic pending external validation. Univariate logistic regression showed odds ratios up to 102 at 24 hours. Vaccination was present in 25/60 patients (41.7%) and showed a non-significant trend toward association with HFNC success (chi-square 3.72, P=0.054). Mortality was 18/23 (78.3%) in the failure group versus 0/37 (0%) in the success group (P<0.001).
conclusionsThe ROX index is a candidate non-invasive bedside predictor of HFNC therapy outcome in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Derived cut-offs, particularly at 12 hours (5.81), showed promising predictive accuracy and can aid clinicians in timely decisions regarding escalation to IMV. These findings are hypothesis-generating and require external validation before clinical implementation.
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.