SynthesisSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina
Effect of liberal or conservative oxygen therapy on the prognosis for mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy for mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Optimal oxygenation in the intensive care unit: what recent trials do-and do not-tell us.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy for intensive care unit patients: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Annals of intensive care · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor critically ill patients, physicians tend to administer sufficient or even excessive oxygen to maintain oxygen saturation at a high level. However, the credibility of the evidence for this practice is unclear.
objectiveTo determine the effects of different oxygen therapy strategies on the outcomes of mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. DESIGN AND
settingSystematic review of the literature and meta-analysis conducted at Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated to Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
methodsWe systematically searched electronic databases such as PubMed and Embase for relevant articles and performed meta-analyses on the effects of different oxygen therapy strategies on the outcomes of mechanically ventilated ICU patients.
resultsA total of 1802 patients from five studies were included. There were equal numbers of patients in the conservative and liberal groups (n = 910 in each group). There was no significant difference between the conservative and liberal groups with regard to 28-day mortality (risk ratio, RR = 0.88; 95% confidence interval, CI = 0.59-1.32; P = 0.55; I2 = 63%). Ninety-day mortality, infection rates, ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilation-free days up to day 28 and vasopressor-free days up to day 28 were comparable between the two strategies.
conclusionsIt is not necessary to use liberal oxygen therapy strategies to pursue a higher level of peripheral oxygen saturation for mechanically ventilated ICU patients. Conservative oxygen therapy was not associated with any statistically significant reduction in mortality.
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.