A Core Outcome Set for Critical Care Ventilation Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to obtain international consensus on a set of core outcome measures that should be recorded in all clinical trials of interventions intended to modify the duration of ventilation for invasively mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU. DESIGN: A two-stage consensus process was undertaken between December 2015 and January 2018. Stage 1 included an online three-round Delphi study and three consensus meetings. Stage 2 included three consensus meetings. SETTING: The setting was international, including Europe, North and South America, Australia, Asia, and Africa. PARTICIPANTS: Organization members representing intensive care survivors and carers; nursing, allied health professionals, and critical care physicians; clinical trials groups and trial investigators; and industry. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Delphi study outcomes were scored by participants from one (least important) to nine (most important). Consensus criteria for including the outcome in the core set were more than 70% of responses rating the outcome above seven and not more than 15% rating the outcome less than 3. From 222 participants, 183 from 38 organizations in 27 countries contributed to the consensus process. Stage 1: Delphi response rates from 200 participants ranged from 89% to 90% across three rounds. Forty-seven outcomes were ranked as follows: 19 met consensus criteria for inclusion and were considered at three consensus meetings (33 participants). Six outcomes were agreed for the core set as follows: extubation, reintubation, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay, health-related quality of life, and mortality. Stage 2: Three consensus meetings (37 participants) agreed on the measures for each outcome. CONCLUSIONS: We used rigorous and well-established methods to develop a core outcome set for use in all clinical trials evaluating interventions intended to modify duration of mechanical ventilation. This core outcome set will inform the design of future trials in this field by strengthening methodological quality and improving comparability across trials.
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 | 0.509 | 0.567 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".