GuidelineAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine2013
An official American Thoracic Society research statement: comparative effectiveness research in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.
Guideline in American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03797313 (Observational Study of Expected Acute Respiratory Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
Observational Study of Expected Acute Respiratory Failure (ARF) Recovery
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stakeholder Research Priorities for Smoking Cessation Interventions within Lung Cancer Screening Programs. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2017Guideline
- Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Improve Patient Experience Among Adults During Transitions from Hospital to Home: the PArTNER study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Trial
- Design of a pragmatic trial in minority children presenting to the emergency department with uncontrolled asthma: The CHICAGO Plan.Contemporary clinical trials · 2017Trial
- Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease self-management activation research trial (COPD-SMART): results of recruitment and baseline patient characteristics.Contemporary clinical trials · 2015Trial
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2025Review
- Research Priorities for Translating Endophenotyping of Adult Obstructive Sleep Apnea to the Clinic: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- Obstructive Sleep Apnea Endophenotypes.Sleep science (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2025Review
- The Potential Role of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists and Glucose-Dependent Insulinotropic Polypeptide (GIP) Receptor Agonists in Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Obesity.Current pulmonology reports · 2025Review
- Article
- Design and rationale for the treating Obstructive Sleep Apnea using Targeted Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation (OSPREY) trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
- Driving Pressure for Ventilation of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Anesthesiology · 2020Review
- Curb Your Enthusiasm: Definitions, Adaptation, and Expectations for Quality of Life in ICU Survivorship.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2020Article
- Nursing Research Priorities in Critical Care, Pulmonary, and Sleep: International Delphi Survey of Nurses, Patients, and Caregivers.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2020Article
- Quality standards in respiratory real-life effectiveness research: the REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT): report from the Respiratory Effectiveness Group-European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Task Force.Clinical and translational allergy · 2019Article
- Patient-centered Outcomes Research in Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine. An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2018Article
- Variation in mortality rates after admission to long-term acute care hospitals for ventilator weaning.Journal of critical care · 2018Article
- Perspectives of survivors, families and researchers on key outcomes for research in acute respiratory failure.Thorax · 2018Article
- The effectiveness of an obstructive sleep apnea screening and treatment program in patients with type 2 diabetes.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2017Article
- Core Outcome Measures for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors. An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2017Article
- Patients' Outcomes After Acute Respiratory Failure: A Qualitative Study With the PROMIS Framework.American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComparative effectiveness research (CER) is intended to inform decision making in clinical practice, and is central to patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR). PURPOSE: To summarize key aspects of CER definitions and provide examples highlighting the complementary nature of efficacy and CER studies in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.
methodsAn ad hoc working group of the American Thoracic Society with experience in clinical trials, health services research, quality improvement, and behavioral sciences in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine was convened. The group used an iterative consensus process, including a review by American Thoracic Society committees and assemblies.
resultsThe traditional efficacy paradigm relies on clinical trials with high internal validity to evaluate interventions in narrowly defined populations and in research settings. Efficacy studies address the question, "Can it work in optimal conditions?" The CER paradigm employs a wide range of study designs to understand the effects of interventions in clinical settings. CER studies address the question, "Does it work in practice?" The results of efficacy and CER studies may or may not agree. CER incorporates many attributes of outcomes research and health services research, while placing greater emphasis on meeting the expressed needs of nonresearcher stakeholders (e.g., patients, clinicians, and others).
conclusionsCER complements traditional efficacy research by placing greater emphasis on the effects of interventions in practice, and developing evidence to address the needs of the many stakeholders involved in health care decisions. Stakeholder engagement is an important component of CER.
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.