ReviewChest2022
Oxygen-Free Days as an Outcome Measure in Clinical Trials of Therapies for COVID-19 and Other Causes of New-Onset Hypoxemia.
Review in Chest, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of targeting normoxemia on supplemental oxygen-free days for adults with acute thermal burns: A stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2025Trial
- What is the optimal approach to analyse ventilator-free days? A simulation study.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Targeted Normoxemia and Supplemental Oxygen-Free Days in Critically Injured Adults: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Fostamatinib for Hospitalized Adults With COVID-19 and Hypoxemia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Modeling treatment effects on absorbing outcomes in clinical trials: Leveraging longitudinal and ordinal data for efficiency gains.Statistical methods in medical research · 2026Article
- Refining normoxemia targets in acute burn care: Reply.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Shock prediction with dipeptidyl peptidase-3 and renin (SPiDeR) in hypoxemic patients with COVID-19.Journal of critical care · 2025Article
- Resource Use in the Randomized Master Protocol for Immune Modulators for Treating COVID-19 (ACTIV-1 IM): A Secondary Data Analysis.CHEST critical care · 2024Article
- Design and implementation of the hospital airway resuscitation trial.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Nebulized Furosemide for Pulmonary Inflammation in Intubated Patients With COVID-19: A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Double-Blind Study.Critical care explorations · 2024Article
- Exploration of alive-and-ventilator free days as an outcome measure for clinical trials of Resuscitative interventions.PloS one · 2024Article
- The statistical design and analysis of pandemic platform trials: Implications for the future.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- The KINETIC phase 2 randomized controlled trial of oral pamapimod-pioglitazone in non-critically ill COVID-19 inpatients.iScience · 2023Article
- Accuracy of Multiple Pulse Oximeters in Stable Critically Ill Patients.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Article
- Evaluating automated electronic case report form data entry from electronic health records.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Article
- Response.Chest · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on byResponse.2023
Authors and funding
24 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Mortality historically has been the primary outcome of choice for acute and critical care clinical trials. However, undue reliance on mortality can limit the scope of trials that can be performed. Large sample sizes are usually needed for trials powered for a mortality outcome, and focusing solely on mortality fails to recognize the importance that reducing morbidity can have on patients' lives. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for rapid, efficient trials to rigorously evaluate new therapies for hospitalized patients with acute lung injury. Oxygen-free days (OFDs) is a novel outcome for clinical trials that is a composite of mortality and duration of new supplemental oxygen use. It is designed to characterize recovery from acute lung injury in populations with a high prevalence of new hypoxemia and supplemental oxygen use. In these populations, OFDs captures two patient-centered consequences of acute lung injury: mortality and hypoxemic lung dysfunction. Power to detect differences in OFDs typically is greater than that for other clinical trial outcomes, such as mortality and ventilator-free days. OFDs is the primary outcome for the Fourth Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV-4) Host Tissue platform, which evaluates novel therapies targeting the host response to COVID-19 among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and new hypoxemia. This article outlines the rationale for use of OFDs as an outcome for clinical trials, proposes a standardized method for defining and analyzing OFDs, and provides a framework for sample size calculations using the OFD outcome.
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.