Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30394920›Full record

SynthesisCritical care medicine2019

The Fragility and Reliability of Conclusions of Anesthesia and Critical Care Randomized Trials With Statistically Significant Findings: A Systematic Review.

François Grolleau, Gary S Collins, Andrei Smarandache, Romain Pirracchio, Clément Gakuba, Isabelle Boutron, Jason W Busse, P J Devereaux, Yannick Le Manach

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Statistical Fragility of Surgical Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Trauma.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

François GrolleauDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, CHU Caen Côte de Nacre, Caen, France.
Gary S CollinsCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Andrei SmarandacheMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Romain Pirracchio
Clément GakubaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, CHU Caen Côte de Nacre, Caen, France.
Isabelle Boutron
Jason W BusseDepartments of Anesthesia and Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, and the Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Pain Research and Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
P J DevereauxDepartments of Medicine & Health Evidence and Impact, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University and the Perioperative Research Group, Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Yannick Le ManachDepartments of Anesthesia & Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University and the Perioperative Research Group, Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRMcMaster University · CAUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe Fragility Index, which represents the number of patients responsible for a statistically significant finding, has been suggested as an aid for interpreting the robustness of results from clinical trials. A small Fragility Index indicates that the statistical significance of a trial depends on only a few events. Our objectives were to calculate the Fragility Index of statistically significant results from randomized controlled trials of anesthesia and critical care interventions and to determine the frequency of distorted presentation of results or "spin". DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched MEDLINE from January 01, 2007, to February 22, 2017, to identify randomized controlled trials exploring the effect of critical care medicine or anesthesia interventions. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they randomized patients 1:1 into two parallel arms and reported at least one statistically significant (p < 0.05) binary outcome (primary or secondary). DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. The Fragility Index was determined for the chosen outcome. We assessed the level of spin in negative trials and the presence of recommendations for clinical practice in positive trials. DATA SYNTHESIS: We identified 166 eligible randomized controlled trials with a median sample size of 207 patients (interquartile range, 109-497). The median Fragility Index was 3 (interquartile range, 1-7), which means that adding three events to one of the trials treatment arms eliminated its statistical significance. High spin was identified in 42% (n = 30) of negative randomized controlled trials, whereas 21% (n = 20) of positive randomized controlled trials provided recommendations. Lower levels of spin and recommendations were associated with publication in journals with high impact factors (p < 0.001 for both).

conclusionsStatistically significant results in anesthesia and critical care randomized controlled trials are often fragile, and study conclusions are frequently affected by spin. Routine calculation of the Fragility Index in medical literature may allow for better understanding of trials and therefore enhance the quality of reporting.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaCritical CareData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID30394920
OpenAlexW2898980258

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.