ReviewCritical care medicine2010
Critical care trial design and interpretation: a primer.
Review in Critical care medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Precision Mechanical Ventilation in ARDS.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The POETIC (PrOcess Evaluation of Trials In Critical care) Framework: A Structured Approach for Designing and Conducting Process Evaluations in Critical Care Trials.Critical care explorations · 2025Article
- Systematic Review of the "Pragmatism" of Pragmatic Critical Care Trials.Critical care explorations · 2022Review
- Outcomes and statistical power in adult critical care randomized trials.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2014Article
- Navigating the institutional review board approval process in a multicenter observational critical care study.Critical care medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBetter understanding of the pathophysiology of critical illness has led to an increase in clinical trials designed to improve the clinical care and outcomes of patients with life-threatening illness. Knowledge of basic principles of clinical trial design and interpretation will assist the clinician in better applying the results of these studies into clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: We review selected clinical trials to highlight important design features that will improve understanding of the results of critical care clinical trials designed to improve clinical care of the critically ill.
resultsTrial design features such as patient selection, bias, sample size calculation, selection of subjects and controls, and primary outcome measure may influence the results of a critical care clinical trial designed to test a therapy targeting improved clinical care. In conjunction with trial design knowledge, understanding the size of the anticipated treatment effect, the importance of any clinical end point achieved, and whether patients in the trial are representative of typical patients with the illness will assist the reader in determining whether the results should be applied to specific patients or usual clinical practice.
conclusionsBetter understanding of important aspects of trial design and interpretation, such as whether patients enrolled in both intervention arms were comparable and whether the primary outcome of the trial is clinically important, will assist the bedside clinician in determining whether to apply the findings from the clinical study into clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.