MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294243154 · doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06640-y

Research interrupted: applying the CONSERVE 2021 Statement to a randomized trial of rehabilitation during critical illness affected by the COVID-19 pandemic

2022· article· en· W4294243154 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Julie C. Reid, Alex Molloy, Geoff Strong, Laurel Kelly, Heather K. O’Grady, Patrick Archambault, Ian Ball, Sue Berney, Karen E. A. Burns, Frédérick D’Aragon, Erick Duan, Shane English, François Lamontagne, Amy M. Pastva, Bram Rochwerg, Andrew Seely, Karim Serri, Jennifer Tsang, Avelino C. Verceles, Brenda Reeve, Alison Fox‐Robichaud, John Muscedere, Margaret S. Herridge, Lehana Thabane, Michelle E. Kho

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversité de MontréalUniversity Health NetworkOttawa HospitalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversity of OttawaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeNiagara Health SystemCégep de SherbrookeUniversité de SherbrookeWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalUniversité LavalImpactMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for InnovationMcMaster UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
KeywordsConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsMedicineRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)PandemicData monitoring committeeClinical endpointResearch designResearch ethicsRehabilitationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Medical emergencyIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyAlternative medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted non-COVID critical care trials globally as intensive care units (ICUs) prioritized patient care and COVID-specific research. The international randomized controlled trial CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength) was forced to halt recruitment at all sites in March 2020, creating immediate challenges. We applied the CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance) statement as a framework to report the impact of the pandemic on CYCLE and describe our mitigation approaches. METHODS: On March 23, 2020, the CYCLE Methods Centre distributed a standardized email to determine the number of patients still in-hospital and those requiring imminent 90-day endpoint assessments. We assessed protocol fidelity by documenting attempts to provide the in-hospital randomized intervention (cycling or routine physiotherapy) and collect the primary outcome (physical function 3-days post-ICU discharge) and 90-day outcomes. We advised sites to prioritize data for the study's primary outcome. We sought feedback on pandemic barriers related to trial procedures. RESULTS: Our main Methods Centre mitigation strategies included identifying patients at risk for protocol deviations, communicating early and frequently with sites, developing standardized internal tools focused on high-risk points in the protocol for monitoring patient progress, data entry, and validation, and providing guidance to conduct some research activities remotely. For study sites, our strategies included determining how institutional pandemic research policies applied to CYCLE, communicating with the Methods Centre about capacity to continue any part of the research, and developing contingency plans to ensure the protocol was delivered as intended. From 15 active sites (12 Canada, 2 US, 1 Australia), 5 patients were still receiving the study intervention in ICUs, 6 required primary outcomes, and 17 required 90-day assessments. With these mitigation strategies, we attempted 100% of ICU interventions, 83% of primary outcomes, and 100% of 90-day assessments per our protocol. CONCLUSIONS: We retained all enrolled patients with minimal missing data using several time-sensitive strategies. Although CONSERVE recommends reporting only major modifications incurred by extenuating circumstances, we suggest that it also provides a helpful framework for reporting mitigation strategies with the goal of improving research transparency and trial management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03471247. Registered on March 20, 2018.

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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.527
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.527
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.322 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207