ArticleBMJ open2025
Non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric critical care: protocol for a cohort study emulating the FIRST-line support for Assistance in Breathing in Children (FIRST-ABC) step-up randomised clinical trial using routinely collected data from the Paediatric Intensive Care Audit Network (PICANet) database.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionThe development of the target trial emulation (TTE) methodology has enhanced the conduct of non-randomised studies. By leveraging readily available routinely collected data, TTEs offer opportunities for complementing randomised controlled trials (RCTs), providing more precise estimates and improving the external validity of RCTs. To explore this potential, we selected a successfully completed RCT as a case study. In the FIRST-line support for Assistance in Breathing in Children (FIRST-ABC) step-up RCT, high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was found to be non-inferior to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in terms of time to liberation from respiratory support in the paediatric critical care setting. We will emulate the FIRST-ABC step-up trial using routinely collected data from the Paediatric Intensive Care Audit Network (PICANet) database. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a TTE that will use longitudinally collected data from the PICANet database. The study aims to emulate the FIRST-ABC step-up RCT using an observational study design in a frequentist framework. We will benchmark the results against the published trial. The study will apply a new-user design by selecting children admitted to paediatric intensive care units that started HFNC or non-invasive ventilatory support (as a surrogate for CPAP). The eligibility criteria and selected outcomes will reflect those of FIRST-ABC within the constraints of the available routinely collected data. We will use advanced quantitative doubly robust methods to minimise the impact of confounding by indication and allow for heterogeneity according to child characteristics. The analysis will be repeated using a Bayesian approach for follow-up research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The research received ethics approval from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Research Ethics Committee. This study will expand the findings from the FIRST-ABC step-up RCT, providing additional insight from a large representative sample using real-world data. The frequentist and Bayesian approaches will enable a discussion about the advantages and drawbacks of the two strategies. The results will be disseminated to the research and clinical community and made accessible to the public. In addition, the study results will be used in future research, which aims to supplement RCTs with additional evidence from a TTE.
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.