Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,378

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Prospective Study of Indexes Predicting the Outcome of Trials of Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation

Open access
Yang, Karl L., Tobin, Martin J.·1991·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The traditional predictors of the outcome of weaning from mechanical ventilation--minute ventilation (VE) and maximal inspiratory pressure (Plmax)--are frequently inaccurate. We developed two new indexes: the first quantitates rapid shallow breathing as the ratio of respiratory frequency to tidal volume (f/VT), and the second is termed CROP, because it integrates thoracic compliance, respiratory rate, arterial oxygenation, and Plmax. METHODS: The threshold values for each index that discriminated best between a successful and an unsuccessful outcome of weaning were determined in 36 patients, and the predictive accuracy of these values was then tested prospectively in an additional 64 patients. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, and the data were also analyzed with receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves, in which the proportions of true positive results and false positive results are plotted against each other for a number of threshold values of an index; the area under the curve reflects the accuracy of the index. RESULTS: Sensitivity was highest for Plmax (1.00), followed closely by the f/VT ratio (0.97). Specificity was highest for the f/VT ratio (0.64) and lowest for Plmax (0.11). The f/VT ratio was the best predictor of successful weaning, and Plmax and the f/VT ratio were the best predictors of failure. The area under the ROC curve for the f/VT ratio (0.89) was larger than that under the curves for the CROP index (0.78, P less than 0.05), Plmax (0.61, P less than 0.001), and VE (0.40, P less than 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid shallow breathing, as reflected by the f/VT ratio, was the most accurate predictor of failure, and its absence the most accurate predictor of success, in weaning patients from mechanical ventilation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199105233242101

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 1,378

Metadata

Authors
Yang, K. L., & Tobin, M. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1991-05-23
Volume
324
Issue
21
Pages
1445-1450
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1993843698
Cited by
1,378
References
8
FWCI
23.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Prospective Study of Indexes Predicting the Outcome of Trials of Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199105233242101
The paper
Yang, K. L., & Tobin, M. J. (1991). A Prospective Study of Indexes Predicting the Outcome of Trials of Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199105233242101

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.