Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41281599›Full record

SynthesisCanadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR2025

Conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Gabriela Freitas Valverde, Bruno Prata Martinez, Dimitri Gusmão Flôres, Cássio Magalhães da Silva E Silva, Sérgio Fernandes de Oliveira Jezler, Iura Gonzalez Alves

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gabriela Freitas ValverdeMedicina Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saúde Pública.
Bruno Prata MartinezFisioterapia Universidade do Estado da Bahia.
Dimitri Gusmão FlôresMedicina Universidade Federal da Bahia.
Cássio Magalhães da Silva E SilvaFisioterapia Universidade Federal da Bahia.
Sérgio Fernandes de Oliveira JezlerIntensive Care Aliança Medical Manager.
Iura Gonzalez AlvesMedicina Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saúde Pública.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2455-3788

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Clinical trials comparing liberal versus conservative oxygen therapy strategies in patients requiring mechanical ventilation have shown contradictory results regarding the best strategy for improving mortality outcomes, length of stay, and ventilator-free days. To summarize the evidence regarding the effects of conservative oxygen therapy compared with liberal oxygen therapy in adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: This systematic review with meta-analysis included controlled and randomized clinical trials obtained from the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Lilacs/bvs, PEDro and ScienceDirect. The effect estimate for mortality was expressed as the relative risk ( Results: Nineteen randomized clinical trials involving more than 10,000 patients were included. Liberal oxygen therapy did not significantly differ from conventional oxygen therapy in terms of mortality ( Conclusion: The findings of this review show no significant differences in clinical outcomes between liberal and conventional oxygen therapy in adult ICU patients. As the burden of proof rests on the intervention, the absence of evidence for the superiority of liberal oxygen therapy means its benefit cannot be assumed.

Indexed as

hyperoxiahypoxiaintensive care medicinemechanical ventilationoxygen

Identifiers

PMID41281599
PMCPMC12633335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.