MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3111196701 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041319

Adaptive randomised controlled non-inferiority multicentre trial (the Ketodex Trial) on intranasal dexmedetomidine plus ketamine for procedural sedation in children: study protocol

2020· article· en· W3111196701 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Naveen Poonai, Kamary Coriolano, Terry P. Klassen, Anna Heath, Maryna Yaskina, Darcy Beer, Scott Sawyer, Maala Bhatt, April Kam, Quynh Doan, Vikram Sabhaney, Martin Offringa, Petros Pechlivanoglou, Serena Hickes, Samina Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of OttawaWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of AlbertaChildren's Hospital of WinnipegHospital for Sick ChildrenWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoChildren’s Health Research InstituteMcMaster Children's HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenOntario Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and TradeMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoUniversity of AlbertaCentre hospitalier universitaire Sainte-JustineChildren's Health FoundationChildren's Health Research InstituteLondon Health Sciences FoundationAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteAcademic Medical Organization of Southwestern OntarioWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineDexmedetomidineKetamineSedationRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaAdverse effectSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Up to 40% of orthopaedic injuries in children require a closed reduction, almost always necessitating procedural sedation. Intravenous ketamine is the most commonly used sedative agent. However, intravenous insertion is painful and can be technically difficult in children. We hypothesise that a combination of intranasal dexmedetomidine plus intranasal ketamine (Ketodex) will be non-inferior to intravenous ketamine for effective sedation in children undergoing a closed reduction. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a six-centre, four-arm, adaptive, randomised, blinded, controlled, non-inferiority trial. We will include children 4-17 years with a simple upper limb fracture or dislocation that requires sedation for a closed reduction. Participants will be randomised to receive either intranasal Ketodex (one of three dexmedetomidine and ketamine combinations) or intravenous ketamine. The primary outcome is adequate sedation as measured using the Paediatric Sedation State Scale. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, time to wakening and adverse effects. The results of both per protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be reported for the primary outcome. All inferential analyses will be undertaken using a response-adaptive Bayesian design. Logistic regression will be used to model the dose-response relationship for the combinations of intranasal Ketodex. Using the Average Length Criterion for Bayesian sample size estimation, a survey-informed non-inferiority margin of 17.8% and priors from historical data, a sample size of 410 participants will be required. Simulations estimate a type II error rate of 0.08 and a type I error rate of 0.047. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario for London Health Sciences Centre and McMaster Research Ethics Board. Other sites have yet to receive approval from their institutions. Informed consent will be obtained from guardians of all participants in addition to assent from participants. Study data will be submitted for publication regardless of results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT0419525.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents→French-language works237,207→