ReviewAnnals of intensive care2024
Conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy for intensive care unit patients: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Annals of intensive care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 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
- Targeted Normoxemia and Supplemental Oxygen-Free Days in Critically Injured Adults: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS): epidemiology, etiology, molecular mechanisms, diagnosis and therapeutic strategies.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Review
- Optimal oxygenation in the intensive care unit: what recent trials do-and do not-tell us.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- From underwater physiology to intensive care: oxygen tolerance unit at the bedside.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- EphA2 monoclonal antibody attenuates hyperoxia-induced acute lung injury by preserving the alveolar-endothelial barrier.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Precision Oxygen Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit: Matching Oxygen Exposure to Patient Phenotypes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Oxygen therapy in the intensive care unit.Medical gas research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIt remains unclear whether conservative oxygen therapy (COT) or liberal oxygen therapy (LOT) is more beneficial to the clinical outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. We systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy for ICU patients.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, MedRxiv, and BioRxiv for reports on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of COT versus LOT on the clinical outcomes of ICU patients published in English before April 2024. The primary outcome was the mortality rate, secondary outcomes included ICU and hospital length of stay, days free from mechanical ventilation support (MVF), vasopressor-free time (VFT), and adverse events.
resultsIn all, 13 RCTs involving 10,632 patients were included in analyses. Meta-analysis showed COT did not reduce mortality at 30-day (risk ratio [RR] = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.09, I
conclusionsCOT did not reduce all-cause mortality in ICU patients. Further RCTs are urgently needed to confirm the impact of COT strategy on specific populations.
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.