Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 189

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ventilation of patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: Has new evidence changed clinical practice?*

Young, Michael P., Manning, Harold L., Wilson, Diana L., Mette, Stephen A., Riker, Richard R., Leiter, J. C., Liu, Stephen K., Bates, Jason T., Parsons, Polly E.·2004·Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: A recent randomized trial of mechanical ventilation in acute lung injury (ALI)/adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) demonstrated a 22% relative reduction in mortality rate using 6 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume vs. 12 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume. We determined whether publication of these findings changed clinical practice. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort, 12 months before (Pre) and 12 months after publication (Post) of a randomized trial supporting the use of a 6 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume strategy. SETTING: Three tertiary care hospitals in northern New England. PATIENTS: From a sample of 943 patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation between 1998 and 1999 (Pre) and between 2000 and 2001 (Post), 300 patients meeting the American-European Consensus Conference definition of ALI or ARDS were selected for analysis. INTERVENTIONS: The tidal volume, tidal volume/kg predicted body weight, and proportion receiving tidal volume/kg > or =6 mL/kg and < or =12 mL/kg predicted body weight were recorded at noon the first day after the diagnosis of ALI or ARDS was established. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pre and Post mean tidal volume (+/- sd) size and tidal volume size/kg predicted body weight were 759 +/- 158 mL (median 750 mL) vs. 639 +/- 138 mL (median 600 mL, p <.001) and 12.3 +/- 2.7 mL/kg (median 11.7 mL/kg) vs. 10.6 +/- 2.4 mL/kg (median 10.7 mL/kg, p <.001) respectively. Pre and Post plateau pressures and peak airway pressures were similar. CONCLUSION: Publication of a trial demonstrating large mortality reductions using small tidal volume was associated with significant reductions in tidal volume delivered to patients with ALI/ARDS. However, wide variation in practice persists, and the proportion of patients receiving tidal volumes within recommended limits (< or =8 mL/kg) remains modest.

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 · 10.1097/01.ccm.0000127784.54727.56

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 189

Metadata

Authors
Young, M. P., Manning, H. L., Wilson, D. L., Mette, S. A., Riker, R. R., Leiter, J. C., Liu, S. K., Bates, J. T., & Parsons, P. E.
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2004-06
Volume
32
Issue
6
Pages
1260-1265
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991696816
Cited by
189
References
6
FWCI
15.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Ventilation of patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: Has new evidence changed clinical practice?*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.ccm.0000127784.54727.56
The paper
Young, M. P., Manning, H. L., Wilson, D. L., Mette, S. A., Riker, R. R., Leiter, J. C., Liu, S. K., Bates, J. T., & Parsons, P. E. (2004). Ventilation of patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: Has new evidence changed clinical practice?*. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000127784.54727.56

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.