Mortality, Attributable Mortality, and Clinical Events as End Points for Clinical Trials of Ventilator‐Associated Pneumonia and Hospital‐Acquired Pneumonia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Appropriate end points are crucial for the successful interpretation of clinical trials. Choosing end points for therapeutic trials of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) requires careful consideration, because they are complications of critical illness. It may be difficult to distinguish the consequences of VAP and HAP from manifestations of the underlying illnesses, and it is important to determine their incremental magnitude, to plan for possible treatment effects and, thus, sample size calculations. In this article, we discuss mortality, attributable mortality, and time to clinical events as possible end points for HAP and/or VAP trials. Because of the paucity of evidence on HAP, we focus predominantly on VAP. In a systematic review of applicable trials, VAP appears to have slight intensive care unit and low hospital-attributable mortality. VAP is associated with prolonged durations of intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, and mechanical ventilation. Because of these findings, superiority trials of VAP treatment that use mortality as a primary end point are not possible. Equivalency studies are possible, but there are sample size implications. The use of time to clinical event end points, especially when combined with mortality, may be the best option for trial in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.117 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it