ArticleBMJ open2024
Effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen versus standard oxygen on mortality in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial (SOHO).
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04468126 (Impact on Mortality of an Oxygenation Strategy Including Standard Oxygen Versus High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Impact on Mortality of an Oxygenation Strategy Including Standard Oxygen Versus High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Noninvasive respiratory supports for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Journal of intensive medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
36 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFirst-line oxygenation strategy in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure consists in standard oxygen or high-flow nasal oxygen therapy. Clinical practice guidelines suggest the use of high-flow nasal oxygen rather than standard oxygen. However, findings remain contradictory with a low level of certainty. We hypothesise that compared with standard oxygen, high-flow nasal oxygen may reduce mortality in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: The Standard Oxygen versus High-flow nasal Oxygen-trial is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial comparing high-flow nasal oxygen versus standard oxygen in patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) for acute respiratory failure with moderate-to-severe hypoxaemia. 1110 patients will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups with a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome is the number of patients who died 28 days after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include comfort, dyspnoea and oxygenation 1 hour after treatment initiation, the number of patients intubated at day 28, mortality in ICU, in hospital and until day 90, and complications during ICU stay. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the central Ethics Committee 'Sud Méditerranée III' (2020-07-05) and patients will be included after informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04468126.
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.