MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599810930 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015420

Feasibility of melatonin for prevention of delirium in critically ill patients: a protocol for a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study

2017· article· en· W2599810930 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lisa Burry, Damon C. Scales, David Williamson, Jennifer Foster, Sangeeta Mehta, Melanie Guenette, Eddy Fan, Michael E. Detsky, Azar Azad, Françis Bernard, Louise Rose

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalMount Sinai HospitalHealth Sciences CentreDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineDeliriumCritically illPlaceboMelatoninProtocol (science)Intensive care medicineRandomized controlled trialAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Delirium is highly prevalent in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. At this time, there is no drug that effectively prevents delirium in critically ill patients. Alterations in melatonin secretion and metabolism may contribute to the development of delirium. Administration of exogenous melatonin has been shown to prevent delirium in non-critically ill surgical and medical patients. This trial will demonstrate the feasibility of a planned multicentre, randomised controlled trial to test the hypothesis that melatonin can prevent delirium in critically ill patients compared with placebo. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This feasibility trial is a randomised, 3-arm, placebo-controlled study of melatonin (2 vs 0.5 mg vs placebo, administered for a maximum of 14 days) for the prevention of delirium in critically ill patients. A total of 69 patients aged 18 years and older with an expected ICU length of stay >48 hours will be recruited from 3 Canadian ICUs. The primary outcome is protocol adherence (ie, overall proportion of study drug doses administered in the prescribed administration window). Secondary outcomes include pharmacokinetic parameters, incidence, time to onset, duration of delirium, number of delirium-free days, adverse events, self-reported sleep quality, rest-activity cycles measured by wrist actigraphy, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay and mortality. Data will be analysed using an intention-to-treat approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by Health Canada and the research ethics board of each study site. Trial results will be presented at international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02615340: Pre-results.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.193
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.193
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207