Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42719835›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026

External validity limitations of randomized trials cited in adult critical care clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review of guidelines published from 2015 to 2020.

Weiting Chen, Li Zhong, Cheng Zheng, Wenyun Ding, Kai Zhang, Nanxia Xuan, Lanxin Cao, Baoping Tian, Wei Cui, Pingli Wang and 2 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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

12 authors.

Weiting Chen *Department of Emergency Medicine, The First People's Hospital of Linhai, Taizhou, Zhejiang, China.
Li Zhong *Department of Critical Care Medicine, First Affiliated Hospital of Huzhou Normal University, The First People's Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Cheng Zheng *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Taizhou Municipal Hospital, Taizhou, Zhejiang, China.
Wenyun Ding *Department of Respiration and Critical Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Kai Zhang *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Nanxia XuanDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Lanxin CaoDepartment of Surgical Intensive Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Baoping TianDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Wei CuiDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Pingli WangDepartment of Respiration and Critical Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Zhongheng ZhangDepartment of Emergency Medicine and Provincial Key Laboratory of Precise Diagnosis and Treatment of Abdominal Infection, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Gensheng ZhangDepartment of Surgical Intensive Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) support evidence-informed decision-making, but the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) cited as supporting evidence may have restricted eligibility criteria and limited external validity for clinically complex populations. This study aimed to describe exclusion criteria and underrepresented populations in RCTs cited by adult critical care CPGs published from October 2015 to October 2020. Design: Systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data sources: PubMed and Scopus electronic databases were searched from October 9, 2015, to October 9, 2020. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: A CPG was included if it fulfilled one of the following criteria: (1) the target population was adult critically ill patients; (2) critical care experts were involved in its development; or (3) all authors agreed that it was relevant to critical care medicine (CCM). CPGs were excluded if (1) the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was not used to develop the recommendations; (2) they were editorials, comments, meta-analyses, and reviews, duplicates, protocols, or irrelevant to CCM; (3) they were original studies that investigated the implementation of the CPGs; or (4) the topics specifically addressed critically ill child patients. Data extraction and analysis: Two independent reviewers extracted CPG characteristics, recommendations, RCT citations, and RCT exclusion criteria. Guideline quality was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Results: Thirty-three CPGs publications were included. The overall average score for each AGREE II domain was >70%. These CPGs contained 1,134 recommendations and cited 1,231 RCT references. Only 8.7% of RCT citations had no exclusion criteria. The most frequent exclusion-related categories were age <18 years (37.9%), pregnancy (29.5%), moribund status (19.2%), surgical history (14.8%), renal impairment (14.2%), liver dysfunction (12.6%), hemodynamic instability (10.2%), traumatic brain injury (8.4%), allergy (8.2%), and coagulopathy (7.8%). Because the included guidelines primarily targeted adult patients, age <18 years should be interpreted as age-defined non-representation rather than inappropriate exclusion. After excluding this age-defined category, pregnancy, moribund status, surgical history, renal impairment, and liver dysfunction were the most frequent underrepresented categories. Conclusion: Among adult critical care CPGs published between 2015 and 2020, the RCT evidence cited in guideline recommendations frequently did not include several clinically important populations. These findings highlight the need for clinicians to consider the external validity of the underlying evidence when applying guideline recommendations to underrepresented or clinically complex patients.

Indexed as

clinical practice guidelinescritical care medicineexternal validityrandomized controlled trialsunderrepresented populations

Identifiers

PMID42719835
PMCPMC13557104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.