Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30741326›Full record

SynthesisIntensive care medicine2019

Fever control in critically ill adults. An individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Paul J Young, Rinaldo Bellomo, Gordon R Bernard, Daniel J Niven, Frederique Schortgen, Manoj Saxena, Richard Beasley, Mark Weatherall

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Intensive care medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Temperature control in sepsis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Turning up the heat on fever research?Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Let fever do its job: The meaning of fever in the pandemic era.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2021
    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

8 authors.

Paul J YoungIntensive Care Unit, Wellington Hospital, Capital and Coast District Health Board, Wellington, New Zealand. Paul.Young@ccdhb.org.nz.ORCID 0000-0002-3428-3083
Rinaldo BellomoAustin Hospital, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia.
Gordon R BernardVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Daniel J NivenDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Frederique SchortgenAdult Intensive Care Unit, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, Créteil, France.
Manoj SaxenaThe George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia.
Richard BeasleyMedical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.
Mark WeatherallUniversity of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.

Funding

Health Research Council of New Zealand Clinical Practitioner Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOne potential way to protect patients from the physiological demands that are a consequence of fever is to aim to prevent fever and to treat it assiduously when it occurs. Our primary hypothesis was that more active fever management would increase survival among patient subgroups with limited physiological reserves such as older patients, patients with higher illness acuity, and those requiring organ support.

methodsWe conducted an individual-level patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the outcomes of ICU patients who received more active fever management with the outcomes of patients who received less active fever management. The primary outcome variable of interest was the unadjusted time to death after randomisation.

resultsOf 1413 trial participants, 707 were assigned to more active fever management and 706 were assigned to less active fever management. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity in the effect of more active compared with less active fever management on survival in any of the pre-specified subgroups that were chosen to identify patients with limited physiological reserves. Overall, more active fever management did not result in a statistically significant difference in survival time compared with less active fever management [hazard ratio 0.91; (95% CI 0.75-1.10), P = 0.32].

conclusionsOur findings do not support the hypothesis that more active fever management increases survival compared with less active fever management overall or in patients with limited physiological reserves.

Indexed as

AdultCritical IllnessFeverHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicFeverNon-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugsParacetamolPhysical coolingSepsisSeptic shock

Identifiers

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.