Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 533

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A multiple-center survey on the use in clinical practice of noninvasive ventilation as a first-line intervention for acute respiratory distress syndrome*

Antonelli, Massimo, Conti, Giorgio, Esquinas, Antonio, Montini, Luca, Maggiore, Salvatore Maurizio, Bello, Giuseppe, Rocco, Monica, Maviglia, Riccardo, Pennisi, Mariano Alberto, Gonzalez-Diaz, Gumersindo, Meduri, Gianfranco Umberto·2007·Critical Care Medicine
DOI 10.1097/01.ccm.0000251821.44259.f3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In randomized studies of heterogeneous patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) was associated with a significant reduction in endotracheal intubation. The role of NPPV in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is still unclear. The objective was to investigate the application of NPPV as a first-line intervention in patients with early ARDS, describing what happens in everyday clinical practice in centers having expertise with NPPV. DESIGN: Prospective, multiple-center cohort study. SETTING: Three European intensive care units having expertise with NPPV. PATIENTS: Between March 2002 and April 2004, 479 patients with ARDS were admitted to the intensive care units. Three hundred and thirty-two ARDS patients were already intubated, so 147 were eligible for the study. INTERVENTIONS: Application of NPPV. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: NPPV improved gas exchange and avoided intubation in 79 patients (54%). Avoidance of intubation was associated with less ventilator-associated pneumonia (2% vs. 20%; p < .001) and a lower intensive care unit mortality rate (6% vs. 53%; p < .001). Intubation was more likely in patients who were older (p = .02), had a higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II (p < .001), or needed a higher level of positive end-expiratory pressure (p = .03) and pressure support ventilation (p = .02). Only SAPS II >34 and a Pao2/Fio2 < or =175 after 1 hr of NPPV were independently associated with NPPV failure and need for endotracheal intubation. CONCLUSIONS: In expert centers, NPPV applied as first-line intervention in ARDS avoided intubation in 54% of treated patients. A SAPS II >34 and the inability to improve Pao2/Fio2 after 1 hr of NPPV were predictors of failure.

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.0000251821.44259.f3

Cites

32 of 32 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 32 references

Cited by

See all 533

Metadata

Authors
Antonelli, M., Conti, G., Esquinas, A., Montini, L., Maggiore, S. M., Bello, G., Rocco, M., Maviglia, R., Pennisi, M. A., Gonzalez-Diaz, G., & Meduri, G. U.
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2007-01
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
18-25
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/01.ccm.0000251821.44259.f3
OpenAlex
W2155876639
Cited by
533
References
32
FWCI
15.56
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: A multiple-center survey on the use in clinical practice of noninvasive ventilation as a first-line intervention for acute respiratory distress syndrome*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.ccm.0000251821.44259.f3
The paper
Antonelli, M., Conti, G., Esquinas, A., Montini, L., Maggiore, S. M., Bello, G., Rocco, M., Maviglia, R., Pennisi, M. A., Gonzalez-Diaz, G., & Meduri, G. U. (2007). A multiple-center survey on the use in clinical practice of noninvasive ventilation as a first-line intervention for acute respiratory distress syndrome*. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000251821.44259.f3

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.