ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2020
Evidence supporting recommendations from international guidelines on treatment, diagnosis, and prevention of HAP and VAP in adults.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improvement in Diagnosis and Management of Nosocomial Pneumonias in a Cardiovascular Surgery Intensive Care Unit: A Multidisciplinary Approach.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Clinical Features and Outcomes of VAP Due to Multidrug-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia, Multidrug-Resistant Bacteremia and Infection Control Interventions in an Intensive Care Unit: Analysis of Six-Year Time-Series Data.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Incidence, Outcomes and Sex-Related Disparities in Pneumonia: A Matched-Pair Analysis with Data from Spanish Hospitals (2016-2019).Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Diagnosis and treatment of pneumonia, a common cause of respiratory failure in patients with neuromuscular disorders.Acta myologica : myopathies and cardiomyopathies : official journal of the Mediterranean Society of Myology · 2021Article
- Antibiotic Use and Fatal Outcomes among Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 in Tacna, Peru.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Individualized Care Is Superior to Standardized Care for the Majority of Critically Ill Patients.Critical care medicine · 2020Article
- Quality of evidence supporting Surviving Sepsis Campaign Recommendations.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2020Article
- Levels of evidence supporting clinical practice guidelines on invasive aspergillosis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020Article
- How to improve research on management of critically ill patients: Lessons learned from negative randomised clinical trials in the intensive care unit.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2020Article
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 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are intended to support clinical decisions and should be based on high-quality evidence. The objective of the study was to evaluate the quality of evidence supporting the recommendations issued in CPGs for therapy, diagnosis, and prevention of hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP). CPGs released by international scientific societies after year 2000, using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, were analyzed. Number and strength of recommendations and quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, and very low) were extracted and indexed in the aforementioned sections. High-quality evidence was based on randomized control trials (RCT) without important limitations and exceptionally on rigorous observational studies. Eighty recommendations were assessed, with 7 (8.7%), 24 (30.0%), 29 (36.3%), and 20 (25.0%) being supported by high, moderate, low, and very low-quality evidence, respectively. Highest evidence degree was reported for 26 prevention recommendations, with 7 (26.9%) supported by high-quality evidence and no recommendation based on very low-quality evidence. In contrast, among 9 recommendations for diagnosis and 45 for therapy, none was supported by high-quality evidence, in spite of being recommended as strong in 33.3% and 46.7%, respectively. Among HAP/VAP diagnosis recommendations, the majority of evidence was rated as low or very low-quality (55.6% and 22.2%, respectively) whereas among HAP/VAP therapy recommendations, 4/5 were rated as low and very low-quality (40% each). In conclusion, among HAP/VAP international guidelines, most recommendations, particularly in therapy, remain supported by observational studies, case reports, and expert opinion. Well-designed RCTs are urgently needed.
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.