Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26088909›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2015

Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury: long-term follow-up of a subgroup of patients from the NICE-SUGAR study.

NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators for the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group, Simon Finfer, Dean Chittock, Yang Li, Denise Foster, Vinay Dhingra, Rinaldo Bellomo, Deborah Cook, Peter Dodek, Paul Hebert and 8 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 153 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Association of Glycemic Variability with Outcomes in Non-diabetic Sepsis Patients: A Prospective Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. A Study of the Relationship between Blood Glucose and Serum Insulin in Acute Cerebrovascular Disease.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators for the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group
Simon Finfer
Dean Chittock
Yang Li
Denise Foster
Vinay Dhingra
Rinaldo Bellomo
Deborah Cook
Peter Dodek
Paul Hebert
William Henderson
Daren Heyland
Alisa Higgins
Colin McArthur
Imogen Mitchell
John Myburgh
Bruce Robinson
Juan Ronco

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the effect of intensive versus conventional blood glucose control in patients with traumatic brain injury.

methodsIn a large international randomized trial patients were randomly assigned to a target blood glucose (BG) range of either 4.5-6.0 mmol/L (intensive control) or <10 mmol/L (conventional control). Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) were identified at randomization and data were collected to examine the extended Glasgow outcome score (includes mortality) at 24 months.

resultsOf the 6104 randomized patients, 391 satisfied diagnostic criteria for TBI; 203 (51.9%) were assigned to intensive and 188 (48.1%) to conventional control; the primary outcome was available for 166 (81.8%) and 149 (79.3%) patients, respectively. The two groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 2 years 98 (58.7%) patients in the intensive group and 79 (53.0%) in the conventional group had a favorable neurological outcome (odds ratio [OR] 1.26, 95% CI 0.81-1.97; P = 0.3); 35 patients (20.9%) in the intensive group and 34 (22.8%) in the conventional group had died (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.53-1.53; P = 0.7); moderate hypoglycemia (BG 2.3-3.9 mmol/L; 41-70 mg/dL) occurred in 160/202 (79.2%) and 17/188 (9.0%), respectively (OR 38.3, 95% CI 21.0-70.1; P < 0.0001); severe hypoglycemia (BG ≤ 2.2 mmol/L; ≤40 mg/dL) in 10 (4.9%) and 0 (0.0%), respectively (OR 20.5 95% CI 1.2-351.6, P = 0.003).

conclusionAlthough patients with traumatic brain injury randomly assigned to intensive compared to conventional glucose control experienced moderate and severe hypoglycemia more frequently, we found no significant difference in clinically important outcomes.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseAdultBrain InjuriesCritical CareCritical IllnessEnergy IntakeFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHyperglycemiaHypoglycemiaInsulinMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultBlood GlucoseInsulin

Identifiers

PMID26088909
OpenAlexW2337626586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.