ReviewClinical oral investigations2021
Network meta-analysis from a pairwise meta-analysis design: to assess the comparative effectiveness of oral care interventions in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients.
Review in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Review
- Prevention of Pneumonia due to Ventilator in Critical Patients with U Shape Oral Hygiene Model: A Systematic Review.Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care · 2023Article
- Effect of Oral Care with Povidone-Iodine in the Prevention of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2023Review
- Oral health care for the critically ill: a narrative review.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn this research, we assessed the usefulness of network meta-analysis (NMA), in creating a hierarchy to define the most effective oral care intervention for the prevention and management of ventilation-associated pneumonia (VAP). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe applied NMA to a previously published robust pairwise meta-analysis. Statistical analyses were based on comparing rates of total VAP events between intervention groups and placebo-usual care groups. We synthesized a netgraph, reported the ranking order of the interventions, and summarized output by a forest plot with a reference treatment placebo/usual care.
resultsThe results of this NMA are from the low and high risk of bias studies, and hence, we strongly recommend not to use findings of this NMA for clinical treatment needs, but based on results of the NMA, we highly recommend for future clinical trials. With our inclusion and exclusion criteria for the NMA, we extracted 25 studies (4473 subjects). The NMA included 16 treatments, 29 pairwise comparisons, and 15 designs. Based on results of NMA frequentist-ranking P scores, tooth brushing (P fixed-0.94, P random-0.89), tooth brushing with povidone-iodine (P fixed-0.90, P random-0.88), and furacillin (P fixed-0.88, P random-0.84) were the best three interventions for preventing VAP.
conclusionsAny conclusion drawn from this NMA should be taken with caution and recommend future clinical trials with the results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: NMA appeared to be an effective platform from which multiple interventions reported in disparate clinical trials could be compared to derive a hierarchical assessment of efficacy in VAP intervention.
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.