The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hyperoxia in the intensive care unit: why more is not always better
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Hyperoxic inspired gas is essential for patients with hypoxic respiratory failure; it is also suspected, however, as a contributor to the pathogenesis of acute lung injury. Several recent studies in humans, animals, and cell culture have identified mechanisms by which hyperoxia may exert deleterious effects on critically ill patients. This review identifies relevant new findings regarding hyperoxic lung injury in the context of providing guidance for future clinical studies. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have clarified the roles of both receptor-mediated and mitochondrial cell death pathways in experimental hyperoxic lung injury. Studies in animals demonstrate that hyperoxia interacts with mechanical stretch to augment ventilator-induced lung injury. Finally, studies in humans implicate hyperoxia in impairment of host defense responses to infections. SUMMARY: Although hyperoxia has not been conclusively identified as a clinically important cause of lung injury in humans, animal data strongly implicate it. Reports of interaction effects between hyperoxia and both mechanical ventilation and host defense suggest that clinical studies of hyperoxia must take these variables into account. Accumulating data about how hyperoxia initiates cell death provide guidance for development of both biomarkers to identify hyperoxia-induced injury and pharmacological interventions to limit hyperoxia's adverse effects.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Monocyte deactivation in septic patients: Restoration by IFN-γ treatment
Döcke, W.-D., Randow, F., Syrbe, U., Krausch, D., Asadullah, K., Reinke, P., Volk, H.-D., & Kox, W. (1997) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm0697-678 · Cited by 1,190
The Fas Signaling Pathway: More Than a Paradigm
Wajant, H. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1071553 · Cited by 957
Wang, X., Ryter, S. W., Dai, C., Tang, Z.-L., Watkins, S. C., Yin, X.-M., Song, R., & Choi, A. M. K. (2003) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1074/jbc.m301624200 · Cited by 136
Budinger, G. R. S., Tso, M., McClintock, D. S., Dean, D. A., Sznajder, J. I., & Chandel, N. S. (2002) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1074/jbc.m109317200 · Cited by 95
Cited by
Kallet, R. H., & Matthay, M. A. (2013) · Respiratory Care · doi:10.4187/respcare.01963 · Cited by 438
de Jonge, E., Peelen, L., Keijzers, P. J., Joore, H., de Lange, D., van der Voort, P. H., Bosman, R. J., de Waal, R. A., Wesselink, R., & de Keizer, N. F. (2008) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc7150 · Cited by 425
Bharadwaj, U., Kasembeli, M. M., Robinson, P., & Tweardy, D. J. (2020) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.119.018440 · Cited by 314
Bench-to-bedside review: the effects of hyperoxia during critical illness
Helmerhorst, H. J. F., Schultz, M. J., van der Voort, P. H. J., de Jonge, E., & van Westerloo, D. J. (2015) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0996-4 · Cited by 187
Metadata
- Authors
- Altemeier, W. A., & Sinclair, S. E.
- Venue
- Current Opinion in Critical Care
- Published
- 2007-02
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 73-78
- ISSN
- 1070-5295 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2004550650
- Cited by
- 211
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 7.51
- 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: Hyperoxia in the intensive care unit: why more is not always better. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/mcc.0b013e32801162cb
- The paper
- Altemeier, W. A., & Sinclair, S. E. (2007). Hyperoxia in the intensive care unit: why more is not always better. Current Opinion in Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/mcc.0b013e32801162cb
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.