Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28646925›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients-protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Søren Marker, Anders Perner, Jørn Wetterslev, Marija Barbateskovic, Janus Christian Jakobsen, Mette Krag, Anders Granholm, Carl Thomas Anthon, Morten Hylander Møller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Complications and Pharmacologic Interventions of Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation During Critical Illness.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2018
    Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Søren MarkerDepartment of Intensive Care, 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. soeren.marker@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3602-4541
Anders PernerDepartment of Intensive Care, 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jørn WetterslevCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Marija BarbateskovicCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Janus Christian JakobsenCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mette KragDepartment of Intensive Care, 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders GranholmDepartment of Intensive Care, 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Carl Thomas AnthonDepartment of Intensive Care, 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Morten Hylander MøllerDepartment of Intensive Care, 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Copenhagen University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStress ulcer prophylaxis is considered standard of care in many critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, the quality of evidence supporting this has recently been questioned, and clinical equipoise exists. Whether there is overall benefit or harm of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients is unknown. Accordingly, we aim to assess patient-important benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no treatment in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding irrespective of hospital setting. METHODS/

designWe will conduct a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis and assess use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in any dose, formulation and duration. We will accept placebo or no prophylaxis as control interventions. The participants will be adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, BIOSIS and Epistemonikos for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The risk of systematic errors (bias) and random errors will be assessed, and the overall quality of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. DISCUSSION: There is a need for a high-quality systematic review to summarise the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalised patients to inform practice and future research. Although stress ulcer prophylaxis is used worldwide, no firm evidence for benefit or harm as compared to placebo or no treatments has been established. Critical illness is a continuum not limited to the ICU setting, which is why it is important to assess the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in a wider perspective than exclusively in ICU patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017055676.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseCritical IllnessAdultClinical Trials as TopicHistamine H2 AntagonistsHospitalizationHumansIntensive Care UnitsMeta-Analysis as TopicPeptic UlcerProton Pump InhibitorsRisk FactorsSystematic Reviews as TopicHistamine H2 AntagonistsProton Pump InhibitorsAcid suppressantsGastrointestinal bleedingHistamine-2-receptor antagonistsProton pump inhibitorsRisk factorsSide effectsStress ulcer prophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID28646925
PMCPMC5483291
OpenAlexW2713789015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.