ArticlePloS one2025
The international trial of nasal oxygen therapy after cardiac surgery (NOTACS) in patients at high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications: Economic evaluation protocol and analysis plan.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy After Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHigh-Flow Nasal Therapy (HFNT) is an innovative non-invasive form of respiratory support. Compared to standard oxygen therapy (SOT), there is an equipoise regarding the effect of HFNT on patient-centred outcomes among those at high risk of developing postoperative pulmonary complications after undergoing cardiac surgery. The NOTACS trial aims to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of HFNT compared to SOT within 90 days of surgery in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. This protocol describes the methods and analyses planned for economic evaluation embedded within the ongoing NOTACS trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The economic evaluation will identify, measure and value resources and health outcomes in both trial arms and compare changes in costs with 'days alive and at home' and EQ-5D-5L quality adjusted life years (QALYs) from the perspective most relevant to the decision-making country. Results from pooling data across the trial will use health and social care sector perspective. All patient-specific data including hospital/community care and health outcomes will be collected prospectively. Unit costs will be sourced from national, published or local data. Missing data will be assessed, with values replaced depending on assumed mechanism of missingness, and impact of replacement on cost-effectiveness assessed. Costs and outcomes by trial arm will be presented as components and totals per patient using a range of descriptive statistics. Regression models for costs and effects will account for patient characteristics, quality of life and health service utilization at baseline. Uncertainty in parameters, sampling and heterogeneity will be addressed through deterministic, probabilistic and subgroup analyses to assess the impact of varying methods and assumptions for costs, outcomes and approaches used in base-case analysis. Results will be interpreted using recommended national cost-effectiveness thresholds. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The study is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN14092678) on 13/05/2020. ISRCTN is a primary registry of the WHO ICTRP network and includes all items from the WHO Trial Registration data set.
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.