Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37841302›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Intensive Care Society2023

The effect of conservative oxygen therapy on mortality in adult critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Daniel S Martin, Helen T Mckenna, Kathryn M Rowan, Doug W Gould, Paul R Mouncey, Michael Pw Grocott, David A Harrison

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel S MartinPeninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6220-8235
Helen T MckennaPeninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Kathryn M RowanIntensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC), London, UK.
Doug W GouldIntensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC), London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4148-3312
Paul R MounceyIntensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC), London, UK.
Michael Pw GrocottClinical & Experimental Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
David A HarrisonIntensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC), London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9002-9098
Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre · GBUniversity Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Plymouth · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Oxygen is the commonest intervention provided to critically ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Despite this, it is unclear how much oxygen should be administered to patients in order to promote the best clinical outcomes and it has been suggested that a strategy of conservative oxygen therapy (COT) may be advantageous. We therefore sought to answer the question of whether COT versus usual or liberal oxygen therapy was beneficial to adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation on an intensive care unit (ICU) by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials comparing COT to liberal or usual oxygen therapy strategies in acutely ill adults (aged ⩾18 years) admitted to an ICU, and reported an outcome of interest. Studies were excluded if they were limited to a specific single disease diagnosis. The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022308436). Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool. Effect estimates were pooled using a random effects model with the between study variance estimated using restricted maximum likelihood and standard errors calculated using the method of Hartung-Knapp/Sidik-Jonkman. Between study heterogeneity was quantified using the Results: Nine eligible studies with 5727 participants fulfilled all eligibility criteria. Trials varied in their definitions of COT and liberal or usual oxygen therapy. The pooled estimate of risk ratio for 90 day mortality for COT versus comparator was 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.88-1.12, 95% prediction interval 0.82-1.21). There was low heterogeneity among studies ( Conclusions: In critically ill adults admitted to an ICU, COT is neither beneficial nor harmful when compared to usual or liberal oxygen therapy. Trials to date have been inconsistent in defining both COT and liberal or usual oxygen therapy, which may have had an impact on the results of this meta-analysis. Future research should focus on unifying definitions and outcome measures.

Indexed as

critical illnessmeta-analysisOxygensystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37841302
PMCPMC10572476
OpenAlexW4386098863

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.