Trial reportHeart (British Cardiac Society)2024
Automated oxygen administration versus manual control in acute cardiovascular care: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05452863 (Automatic Oxygen Supply With the O2matic Device for the Treatment of Hospitalized Heart Patients With Hypoxia), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Automatic Oxygen Supply With the O2matic Device for the Treatment of Hospitalized Heart Patients With Hypoxia
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Manual compared to automated closed-loop oxygen control strategies in hospitalised adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOxygen therapy is commonly administered to patients with acute cardiovascular conditions during hospitalisation. Both hypoxaemia and hyperoxia can cause harm, making it essential to maintain oxygen saturation (SpO
methodsIn this randomised controlled trial, 60 patients admitted to a cardiac department with an acute cardiovascular condition requiring oxygen therapy were randomised to either standard care (manual oxygen administration) or AOA via the O2matic device. The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent within the desired SpO
resultsPatients had a mean age of 75.8±12.4 years, with an average SpO
conclusionsAOA with the O2matic device is superior to standard manual control in maintaining SpO TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05452863.
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.