ArticleCritical care science2025
Statistical analysis plan for hemodynamic phenotype-based, capillary refill time-targeted resuscitation in early septic shock: the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK-2 randomized clinical trial.
Article in Critical care science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Persistent tissue hypoperfusion improves risk stratification beyond vasopressor dose in refractory septic shock: a secondary analysis of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK-2 trial.Intensive care medicine · 2026Trial
- Bedside predictors of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in children with suspected infection undergoing cardiac ultrasound.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundANDROMEDA-SHOCK 2 is an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing hemodynamic phenotype-based, capillary refill time-targeted resuscitation in early septic shock to standard care resuscitation to test the hypothesis that the former is associated with lower morbidity and mortality in terms of hierarchal analysis of outcomes.
objectiveTo report the statistical plan for the ANDROMEDA--SHOCK 2 randomized clinical trial.
methodsWe briefly describe the trial design, patients, methods of randomization, interventions, outcomes, and sample size. We portray our planned statistical analysis for the hierarchical primary outcome using the stratified win ratio method, as well as the planned analysis for the secondary and tertiary outcomes. We also describe the subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Finally, we provide details for presenting our results, including mock tables, baseline characteristics, and the effects of treatments on outcomes.
conclusionAccording to best trial practices, we report our statistical analysis plan and data management plan prior to locking the database and initiating the analyses. We anticipate that this practice will prevent analysis bias and improve the utility of the study's reported results.
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.