MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389133270 · doi:10.1136/emermed-2023-213290

Balanced crystalloids (RInger’s lactate) versus normal Saline in adults with diabetic Ketoacidosis in the Emergency Department (BRISK-ED): a pilot randomised controlled trial

2023· article· en· W4389133270 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Justin W. Yan, Ahmed Slim, Kristine Van Aarsen, Yun‐Hee Choi, Christopher D. Byrne, Naveen Poonai, Haley Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueEmergency Medicine Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteLondon Health Sciences CentreLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersSchulich School of Medicine and DentistrySchulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western UniversityLawson Health Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentDiabetic ketoacidosisSalineKetoacidosisAnesthesiaRandomized controlled trialPilot trialDiabetes mellitusEmergency medicinePhysical therapySurgeryPsychiatryType 1 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Current diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) treatment guidelines recommend using normal saline (NS); however, NS may delay DKA resolution by causing more hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis compared with balanced crystalloids. This study's objective was to determine the feasibility of a future multicentred randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing intravenous Ringer's lactate (RL) with NS in managing ED patients with DKA. METHODS: We conducted a parallel-arm, triple-blind, pilot RCT of adults (≥18 years) with DKA at a Canadian academic tertiary care ED. The primary feasibility outcome was recruitment rate (target ≥41.3% of eligible participants over the 1-year study period); the primary efficacy outcome was time elapsed from ED presentation to DKA resolution. The superiority margin for a clinically significant difference was chosen to be a 40% time reduction to DKA resolution. We also assessed the need to break allocation concealment and loss to follow-up. Patients with clinical suspicion for DKA were screened for inclusion and enrolled patients were randomised 1:1 to receive RL or NS. Patients, clinicians and outcome assessors were blinded to allocation. RESULTS: We enrolled 52 (25 RL, 27 NS) of 60 eligible patients (86.7%), exceeding our target recruitment rate. There were more patients in the NS group with type 1 diabetes, and more patients in the RL group had an admission co-diagnosis in addition to DKA. For the 44 participants with confirmed laboratory evidence of resolution, median (IQR) time to DKA resolution for RL versus NS was 15.7 (10.4-18.8) and 12.7 (7.9-19.2) hours, respectively. There were no cases where blinding was broken, and there was no loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial demonstrated our protocol's feasibility by exceeding our target recruitment rate. Our results may be used to inform future multicentre trials to compare the safety and efficacy of RL and NS in managing DKA in the ED. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04926740.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmergency Medicine JournalSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207