↓ Skip to main content

The efficacy of initial ventilation strategy for adult immunocompromised patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: study protocol for a multicentre randomized controlled trial (VENIM)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The efficacy of initial ventilation strategy for adult immunocompromised patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: study protocol for a multicentre randomized controlled trial (VENIM)
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12890-017-0467-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tao Wang, Gang Liu, Kun He, Xin Lu, Xianquan Liang, Meng Wang, Rong Zhu, Zongru Li, Feng Chen, Jun Ke, Qingming Lin, Chuanyun Qian, Bo Li, Jie Wei, Jingjun Lv, Li Li, Yanxia Gao, Guofeng Wu, Xiaohong Yu, Weiqin Wei, Ying Deng, Fengping Wang, Hong Zhang, Yun Zheng, Hong Zhan, Jinli Liao, Yingping Tian, Dongqi Yao, Jingsong Zhang, Xufeng Chen, Lishan Yang, Jiali Wu, Yanfen Chai, Songtao Shou, Muming Yu, Xudong Xiang, Dongshan Zhang, Fengying Chen, Xiufeng Xie, Yong Li, Bo Wang, Wenzhong Zhang, Yongli Miao, Michael Eddleston, Jianqiang He, Yong Ma, Shengyong Xu, Yi Li, Huadong Zhu, Xuezhong Yu

Abstract

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is still one of the most severe complications in immunocompromised patients. Our previous systematic review showed noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) reduced mortality, length of hospitalization and ICU stay in AIDS/hematological malignancy patients with relatively less severe ARF, compared to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). However, this systematic review was based on 13 observational studies and the quality of evidence was low to moderate. The efficacy of NIV in more severe ARF and in patients with other causes of immunodeficiency is still unclear. We aim to determine the efficacy of the initial ventilation strategy in managing ARF in immunocompromised patients stratified by different disease severity and causes of immunodeficiency, and explore predictors for failure of NIV. The VENIM is a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effects of NIV compared with IMV in adult immunocompromised patients with severe hypoxemic ARF. Patients who meet the indications for both forms of ventilatory support will be included. Primary outcome will be 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will include in-hospital mortality, length of stay in hospital, improvement of oxygenation, nosocomial infections, seven-day organ failure, adverse events of intervention, et al. Subgroups with different disease severity and causes of immunodeficiency will also be analyzed. VENIM is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at assessing the efficacy of initial ventilation strategy in treating moderate and severe acute respiratory failure in immunocompromised patients. The result of this RCT may help doctors with their ventilation decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02983851 . Registered 2 September 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 10%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 39 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Engineering 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 40 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
#7,482,733
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#581
of 1,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,681
of 318,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#11
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.