Feasibility of melatonin for prevention of delirium in critically ill patients: a protocol for a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.066 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.008 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".