Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32888632›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of anaesthesia2020

Generalisability of randomised trials evaluating perioperative β-blocker therapy in noncardiac surgery.

Markus Titz, Michael Schwameis, Calvin Kienbacher, Nina Buchtele, Dominik Roth, Andreas Duma, Peter Nagele, Christian Schörgenhofer, Harald Herkner

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of anaesthesia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Markus TitzDepartment of Orthopaedics & Trauma Surgery, Klinikum Floridsdorf, Vienna, Austria.
Michael SchwameisDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: michael.schwameis@meduniwien.ac.at.
Calvin KienbacherDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Nina BuchteleDepartment of Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Dominik RothDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Andreas DumaDepartment of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Peter NageleDepartment of Anaesthesia & Critical Care, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Christian SchörgenhoferDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Harald HerknerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · ATUniversity of Chicago · US

Funding

NOVEL STRATEGY FOR PERIOPERATIVE BETA-BLOCKER THERAPYR01HL126892 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI NAGELE, PETER · 2015 to 2019
$2.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL126892
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe limited applicability of evidence from RCTs in real-word practice is considered a potential bottleneck for evidence-based practice but rarely systematically assessed. Using our failure to recruit patients into a perioperative beta-blocker trial, we set out to analyse the restrictiveness and generalisability of trial eligibility criteria in a real-world cohort.

methodsWe prospectively included adult patients (≥18 yr) scheduled for elective noncardiac surgery at an academic tertiary care facility who were screened for inclusion in a planned perioperative beta-blocker RCT, which was terminated owing to recruitment failure. The primary outcome was the proportion of screened patients who matched the eligibility criteria of 36 published RCTs included in a large Cochrane meta-analysis on perioperative beta-blocker therapy. The pragmatic/explanatory level of each RCT was assessed using the PRagmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary 2 (PRECIS-2) score, which ranges from 9 points (indicating a very explanatory study) to 45 points (indicating a very pragmatic study).

resultsA total of 2241 patients (54% female, n=1215; 52 [standard deviation, 20] yr) were included for the assessment of trial eligibility between October 2015 and January 2016. Only a small proportion of patients matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for each of the 36 RCTs, ranging from 53% to 0%. The average proportion of patients who did match the eligibility criteria of all 36 RCTs was 6.5% (n=145; 95% confidence interval, 6.3-6.6). A higher PRECIS-2 score was associated with a higher proportion of matching patients (P<0.001).

conclusionsTrial eligibility criteria in perioperative beta-blocker therapy trials are overly restrictive and not generalisable to a real-world surgical population. CLINICAL

trial registrationEudraCT#: 2015-002366-23.

Indexed as

Elective Surgical ProceduresPatient SelectionResearch DesignAdrenergic beta-AntagonistsAustriaCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPerioperative CareProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdrenergic beta-Antagonistseligibility determinationevidence-based practiceexplanatory trialmeta-analysisperioperative medicinepragmatic trialrandomised controlled trials

Identifiers

PMID32888632
PMCPMC9756304
OpenAlexW3082916187

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.