Trial reportBMJ open2015
A multicentre, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial, comparing high flow therapy with nasal continuous positive airway pressure as primary support for preterm infants with respiratory distress (the HIPSTER trial): study protocol.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-invasive respiratory support in preterm infants as primary mode: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- FIRST-line support for Assistance in Breathing in Children (FIRST-ABC): a multicentre pilot randomised controlled trial of high-flow nasal cannula therapy versus continuous positive airway pressure in paediatric critical care.Critical care (London, England) · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Effect of continuous positive airway pressure versus nasal cannula on late preterm and term infants with transient tachypnea of the newborn.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- Waived Consent in Perinatal/Neonatal Research-When Is It Appropriate?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2019Review
- The Effect of the Treatment with Heated Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome in China: A Single-Center Experience.Canadian respiratory journal · 2017Observational
- Key paediatric messages from Amsterdam.ERJ open research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHigh flow (HF) therapy is an increasingly popular mode of non-invasive respiratory support for preterm infants. While there is now evidence to support the use of HF to reduce extubation failure, there have been no appropriately designed and powered studies to assess the use of HF as primary respiratory support soon after birth. Our hypothesis is that HF is non-inferior to the standard treatment--nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP)--as primary respiratory support for preterm infants. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The HIPSTER trial is an unblinded, international, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial. Eligible infants are preterm infants of 28-36(+6) weeks' gestational age (GA) who require primary non-invasive respiratory support for respiratory distress in the first 24 h of life. Infants are randomised to treatment with either HF or NCPAP. The primary outcome is treatment failure within 72 h after randomisation, as determined by objective oxygenation, blood gas, and apnoea criteria, or the need for urgent intubation and mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of intubation, pneumothorax, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, nasal trauma, costs associated with hospital care and parental stress. With a specified non-inferiority margin of 10%, using a two-sided 95% CI and 90% power, the study requires 375 infants per group (total 750 infants). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the relevant human research ethics committees at The Royal Women's Hospital (13/12), The Royal Children's Hospital (33144A), The Mercy Hospital for Women (R13/34), and the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (2013/1657). The trial is currently recruiting at 9 centres in Australia and Norway. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed international journals, and presented at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ID: ACTRN12613000303741.
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.