ArticleRespiratory care2024
A Master Protocol Template for Pediatric ARDS Studies.
Article in Respiratory care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Positive end-expiratory pressure in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: a narrative review.Translational pediatrics · 2026Review
- Postextubation Noninvasive Respiratory Support in Children.Respiratory care · 2025Review
- Protocols for Prone Positioning in Pediatric Patients with Hypoxemia: Impact on Oxygenation, Lung Function, and Clinical Safety.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPediatric ARDS is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. High-quality data from clinical trials in children are limited due to numerous barriers to their design and execution. Here we describe the collaborative development of a master protocol as a tool to address some of these barriers and support the conduct of pediatric ARDS studies.
methodsUsing PubMed, we performed a literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric ARDS to characterize the current state and evaluate potential benefit of harmonized master protocols. We used a multi-stakeholder, collaborative, and team science-oriented process to develop a master protocol template with links to common data elements (CDEs) for pediatric ARDS trials.
resultsWe identified 11 RCTs that enrolled between 14-200 total subjects per trial. Interventions included mechanical ventilation, prone positioning, corticosteroids, and surfactant. Studies displayed significant heterogeneity in ARDS definition, design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and reported outcomes. Mortality was reported in 91% of trials and ventilator-free days in 73%. The trial heterogeneity made pooled analysis unfeasible. These findings underscore the need for a method to facilitate combined analysis of future trials through standardization of trial elements. As a potential solution, we developed a master protocol, iteratively revised with input from a multidisciplinary panel of experts and organized into 3 categories: instructions and general information, templated language, and a series of text options of common pediatric ARDS trial scenarios. Finally, we linked master protocol sections to relevant CDEs previously defined for pediatric ARDS and captured in a series of electronic case report forms.
conclusionsThe majority of pediatric ARDS trials identified were small and heterogeneous in study design and outcome reporting. Using a master protocol template for pediatric ARDS trials with CDEs would support combining and comparing pediatric ARDS trial findings and increase the knowledge base.
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.