Composite Primary Outcomes Reported in Studies of Critical Care: A Scoping Review.

Q4 Medicine Critical care explorations Pub Date : 2025-01-20 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1097/CCE.0000000000001195
Prashanti Marella, Sansuka De Silva, Antony G Attokaran, Kevin B Laupland, Lars Eriksson, Mahesh Ramanan
{"title":"Composite Primary Outcomes Reported in Studies of Critical Care: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Prashanti Marella, Sansuka De Silva, Antony G Attokaran, Kevin B Laupland, Lars Eriksson, Mahesh Ramanan","doi":"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Composite primary outcomes (CPO) (incorporating both mortality and non-mortality outcomes) offer several advantages over mortality as an outcome for critical care research. Our objective was to explore and map the literature to report on CPO evaluated in critical care research.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to January 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>All studies (both non-randomized controlled trial [RCT] and RCT) conducted in ICUs treating adult patients (18 yr old or older) that described CPOs and their definitions, were included for mapping, reporting, and analyzing CPOs without any restrictions.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Independent double-screening of abstracts/full texts and data extraction was performed using a pilot-tested extraction template. The data collected included characteristics of CPO, definitions, trends, and death handling techniques used while reporting the CPO.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Seventeen CPOs were extracted from 71 studies, predominantly reported in the setting of pharmaceutical studies (48/71, 67.6%), used RCT methodology (60/71, 84.5%), and were mostly single-center studies (55/71, 77.5%). Ventilator-free days were the most commonly reported CPO (29/71, 40.8%) with marked variability in the definition used and death handling (0 d in 33 studies and -1 d in 7 studies). The most common statistical paradigm used was frequentist (63/71, 88.7%) and the study follow-up time was 90 days with 28 studies using this timeline (28/71, 39.4%). Narrative synthesis highlighted the variability in defining CPO.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CPOs are an emerging set of outcomes increasingly reported in critical care research. There was significant heterogeneity in definitions used, follow-up times, and reporting trends.</p>","PeriodicalId":93957,"journal":{"name":"Critical care explorations","volume":"7 1","pages":"e1195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749510/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Composite primary outcomes (CPO) (incorporating both mortality and non-mortality outcomes) offer several advantages over mortality as an outcome for critical care research. Our objective was to explore and map the literature to report on CPO evaluated in critical care research.

Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to January 2024.

Study selection: All studies (both non-randomized controlled trial [RCT] and RCT) conducted in ICUs treating adult patients (18 yr old or older) that described CPOs and their definitions, were included for mapping, reporting, and analyzing CPOs without any restrictions.

Data extraction: Independent double-screening of abstracts/full texts and data extraction was performed using a pilot-tested extraction template. The data collected included characteristics of CPO, definitions, trends, and death handling techniques used while reporting the CPO.

Data synthesis: Seventeen CPOs were extracted from 71 studies, predominantly reported in the setting of pharmaceutical studies (48/71, 67.6%), used RCT methodology (60/71, 84.5%), and were mostly single-center studies (55/71, 77.5%). Ventilator-free days were the most commonly reported CPO (29/71, 40.8%) with marked variability in the definition used and death handling (0 d in 33 studies and -1 d in 7 studies). The most common statistical paradigm used was frequentist (63/71, 88.7%) and the study follow-up time was 90 days with 28 studies using this timeline (28/71, 39.4%). Narrative synthesis highlighted the variability in defining CPO.

Conclusions: CPOs are an emerging set of outcomes increasingly reported in critical care research. There was significant heterogeneity in definitions used, follow-up times, and reporting trends.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重症监护研究报告的综合主要结局:范围综述。
目的:综合主要结局(CPO)(包括死亡率和非死亡率结局)作为重症监护研究的结局比死亡率有几个优势。我们的目的是探索和绘制关于重症监护研究中评估CPO的文献。数据来源:PubMed, Embase,护理和相关健康文献累积索引,Scopus和Cochrane图书馆,2000年1月至2024年1月。研究选择:纳入所有在icu治疗成人患者(18岁或以上)中进行的描述CPOs及其定义的研究(非随机对照试验[RCT]和RCT),不受任何限制地绘制、报告和分析CPOs。数据提取:使用试点测试的提取模板对摘要/全文和数据提取进行独立的双重筛选。收集的数据包括CPO的特征、定义、趋势和报告CPO时使用的死亡处理技术。数据综合:从71项研究中提取了17项CPOs,主要报道在药物研究的背景下(48/71,67.6%),采用RCT方法(60/71,84.5%),主要是单中心研究(55/71,77.5%)。无呼吸机天数是最常见的CPO(29/ 71,40.8%),使用的定义和死亡处理存在显著差异(33项研究为0天,7项研究为-1天)。最常用的统计范式是频率主义(frequentist)(63/71, 88.7%),研究随访时间为90天,其中28项研究使用该时间线(28/71,39.4%)。叙事综合强调了定义CPO的可变性。结论:CPOs是危重症研究中越来越多报道的一组新兴结果。在使用的定义、随访时间和报告趋势上存在显著的异质性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Heterogeneity of Intermediate Care Organization Within a Single Healthcare System. Heterogeneity of Intermediate Care Organization Within a Single Healthcare System. Multidimensional 1-Year Outcomes After Intensive Care Admission for Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children. Composite Primary Outcomes Reported in Studies of Critical Care: A Scoping Review. Evaluating the Adequacy of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection As a Quality Measure: A Cross-Sectional Analysis at a Single Tertiary Care Center.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1