ArticleCritical care medicine2015
Mortality in Multicenter Critical Care Trials: An Analysis of Interventions With a Significant Effect.
Article in Critical care medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2022Pooled it
- Effects on health-related quality of life of interventions affecting survival in critically ill patients: a systematic review.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Omega-6 sparing effects of parenteral lipid emulsions-an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Scandinavian SSAI clinical practice guideline on choice of first-line vasopressor for patients with acute circulatory failure.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2016Pooled it
- Scandinavian clinical practice guideline on fluid and drug therapy in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2016Guideline
- Trial
- INCEPT: The Intensive Care Platform Trial-Design and protocol.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Making sense of contradictory evidence in Covid-19 trials.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Article
- Focus on clinical trial interpretation.Intensive care medicine · 2020Article
- Time to stop randomized and large pragmatic trials for intensive care medicine syndromes: the case of sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Prevention of post-cardiac surgery vitamin D deficiency in children with congenital heart disease: a pilot feasibility dose evaluation randomized controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2020Article
- A Review of Challenges and Opportunities in Machine Learning for Health.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020Article
- Is research from databases reliable? No.Intensive care medicine · 2019Article
- Innovation and safety in critical care: should we collaborate with the industry? Con.Intensive care medicine · 2018Article
- Do trials that report a neutral or negative treatment effect improve the care of critically ill patients? Yes.Intensive care medicine · 2018Article
- Expert statement for the management of hypovolemia in sepsis.Intensive care medicine · 2018Review
- Low tidal volume ventilation.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2018Article
- Scandinavian SSAI clinical practice guideline on choice of inotropic agent for patients with acute circulatory failure.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2018Review
- Reproducibility of clinical research in critical care: a scoping review.BMC medicine · 2018Article
- Cost Analysis of Noninvasive Helmet Ventilation Compared with Use of Noninvasive Face Mask in ARDS.Canadian respiratory journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byKnown Unknowns.2015
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
44 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to identify all treatments that affect mortality in adult critically ill patients in multicenter randomized controlled trials. We also evaluated the methodological aspects of these studies, and we surveyed clinicians' opinion and usual practice for the selected interventions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched. Further articles were suggested for inclusion from experts and cross-check of references. STUDY SELECTION: We selected the articles that fulfilled the following criteria: publication in a peer-reviewed journal; multicenter randomized controlled trial design; dealing with nonsurgical interventions in adult critically ill patients; and statistically significant effect in unadjusted landmark mortality. A consensus conference assessed all interventions and excluded those with lack of reproducibility, lack of generalizability, high probability of type I error, major baseline imbalances between intervention and control groups, major design flaws, contradiction by subsequent larger higher quality trials, modified intention to treat analysis, effect found only after adjustments, and lack of biological plausibility. DATA EXTRACTION: For all selected studies, we recorded the intervention and its comparator, the setting, the sample size, whether enrollment was completed or interrupted, the presence of blinding, the effect size, and the duration of follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: We found 15 interventions that affected mortality in 24 multicenter randomized controlled trials. Median sample size was small (199 patients) as was median centers number (10). Blinded trials enrolled significantly more patients and involved more centers. Multicenter randomized controlled trials showing harm also involved significantly more centers and more patients (p = 0.016 and p = 0.04, respectively). Five hundred fifty-five clinicians from 61 countries showed variable agreement on perceived validity of such interventions.
conclusionsWe identified 15 treatments that decreased/increased mortality in critically ill patients in 24 multicenter randomized controlled trials. However, design affected trial size and larger trials were more likely to show harm. Finally, clinicians view of such trials and their translation into practice varied.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25821918What 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.