MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394873556 · doi:10.1097/pcc.0000000000003516

Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate a Permissive Blood Pressure Target Versus Usual Care in Critically Ill Children with Hypotension (PRESSURE)

2024· article· en· W4394873556 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Darnell, Alanna Kathleen Brown, Emma Laing, Julia Edwards, David A Harrison, Joseph C. Manning, Mark Peters, Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Samiran Ray, Zia Sadique, Barnaby R. Scholefield, Dermot Shortt, Lamprini Lampro, Carly Au, Kathy Rowan, Paul Mouncey, David Inwald

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersKing's College LondonNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialRandomizationBlood pressureClinical trialMechanical ventilationGestational ageIntensive careIntensive care unitMean arterial pressureIntensive care medicineEmergency medicinePediatricsAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicinePregnancyHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Management of hypotension is a fundamental part of pediatric critical care, with cardiovascular support in the form of fluids or vasoactive drugs offered to every hypotensive child. However, optimal blood pressure (BP) targets are unknown. The PRotocolised Evaluation of PermiSSive BP Targets Versus Usual CaRE (PRESSURE) trial aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a permissive mean arterial pressure (MAP) target of greater than a fifth centile for age compared with usual care. DESIGN: Pragmatic, open, multicenter, parallel-group randomized control trial (RCT) with integrated economic evaluation. SETTING: Eighteen PICUs across the United Kingdom. PATIENTS: Infants and children older than 37 weeks corrected gestational age to 16 years accepted to a participating PICU, on mechanical ventilation and receiving vasoactive drugs for hypotension. INTERVENTIONS: Adjustment of hemodynamic support to achieve a permissive MAP target greater than fifth centile for age during invasive mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Randomization is 1:1 to a permissive MAP target or usual care, stratified by site and age group. Due to the emergency nature of the treatment, approaching patients for written informed consent will be deferred until after randomization. The primary clinical outcome is a composite of death and days of ventilatory support at 30 days. Baseline demographics and clinical status will be recorded as well as daily measures of BP and organ support, and discharge outcomes. This RCT received Health Research Authority approval (reference 289545), and a favorable ethical opinion from the East of England-Cambridge South Research Ethics Committee on May 10, 2021 (reference number 21/EE/0084). The trial is registered and has an International Standard RCT Number (reference 20609635). CONCLUSIONS: Trial findings will be disseminated in U.K. national and international conferences and in peer-reviewed journals.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0100.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1230.015

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207