Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,988

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report: Features and Measurements of Experimental Acute Lung Injury in Animals

Open access
Matute-Bello, Gustavo, Downey, Gregory, Moore, Bethany B., Groshong, Steve D., Matthay, Michael A., Slutsky, Arthur S., Kuebler, Wolfgang M.·2011·American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology

Abstract

Acute lung injury (ALI) is well defined in humans, but there is no agreement as to the main features of acute lung injury in animal models. A Committee was organized to determine the main features that characterize ALI in animal models and to identify the most relevant methods to assess these features. We used a Delphi approach in which a series of questionnaires were distributed to a panel of experts in experimental lung injury. The Committee concluded that the main features of experimental ALI include histological evidence of tissue injury, alteration of the alveolar capillary barrier, presence of an inflammatory response, and evidence of physiological dysfunction; they recommended that, to determine if ALI has occurred, at least three of these four main features of ALI should be present. The Committee also identified key "very relevant" and "somewhat relevant" measurements for each of the main features of ALI and recommended the use of least one "very relevant" measurement and preferably one or two additional separate measurements to determine if a main feature of ALI is present. Finally, the Committee emphasized that not all of the measurements listed can or should be performed in every study, and that measurements not included in the list are by no means "irrelevant." Our list of features and measurements of ALI is intended as a guide for investigators, and ultimately investigators should choose the particular measurements that best suit the experimental questions being addressed as well as take into consideration any unique aspects of the experimental design.

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 · 10.1165/rcmb.2009-0210st

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,988

Metadata

Authors
Matute-Bello, G., Downey, G., Moore, B. B., Groshong, S. D., Matthay, M. A., Slutsky, A. S., & Kuebler, W. M.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology
Published
2011-05
Volume
44
Issue
5
Pages
725-738
ISSN
  • 1044-1549 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4989
OpenAlex
W1990819855
Cited by
1,988
References
2
FWCI
32.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report: Features and Measurements of Experimental Acute Lung Injury in Animals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1165/rcmb.2009-0210st
The paper
Matute-Bello, G., Downey, G., Moore, B. B., Groshong, S. D., Matthay, M. A., Slutsky, A. S., & Kuebler, W. M. (2011). An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report: Features and Measurements of Experimental Acute Lung Injury in Animals. American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology. https://doi.org/10.1165/rcmb.2009-0210st

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.