Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41459400›Full record

ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2025

Statistical analysis plan for the Australasian Resuscitation in sepsis evaluation: FLUid or vasopressors in emergency department sepsis (ARISE FLUIDS) trial.

Elissa M Milford, Stephen P J Macdonald, Ary Serpa-Neto, Anthony Delaney, Alisa M Higgins, Belinda Howe, Sandra L Peake

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 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

7 authors.

Elissa M MilfordRoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Stephen P J MacdonaldCentre for Clinical Research in Emergency Medicine, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, Perth, WA, Australia.
Ary Serpa-NetoDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, VIC, Australia.
Anthony DelaneyIntensive Care, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Alisa M HigginsAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC-RC), School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Belinda HoweAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC-RC), School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Sandra L PeakeAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC-RC), School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The optimal approach to haemodynamic resuscitation in patients with septic shock is uncertain and will be evaluated in The Australasian Resuscitation In Sepsis Evaluation: FLUid or vasopressors In emergency Department Sepsis (ARISE FLUIDS) trial. Objective: The objective of this study was to describe the prespecified ARISE FLUIDS statistical analysis plan (SAP). Design setting participants and interventions: The ARISE FLUIDS trial is a 1000-participant international multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing restricted intravenous fluid volume and earlier introduction of vasopressors (vasopressor strategy) to larger initial intravenous fluid volume and later introduction of vasopressors if required (fluids strategy) in adults with early septic shock presenting to the emergency department in participating sites in Australia, New Zealand and Ireland. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital at 90 days post randomisation, and the difference in medians between the two treatment groups will be estimated using a linear quantile mixed-effect regression model. Secondary outcomes include duration of survival censored at day 90, ventilator-, vasopressor-, and acute renal replacement-free days censored at day 28 and death or disability at 6 and 12 months. Conclusion: ARISE FLUIDS will compare the effects of a vasopressor vs. fluids strategy on days alive and out of hospital at 90 days in adults with early septic shock. The prespecified SAP is reported here to mitigate analysis bias.

Indexed as

Fluid therapyHaemodynamicsSepsisSeptic shockVasoconstrictor agents

Identifiers

PMID41459400
PMCPMC12741368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.