Cargando…
Are large randomised controlled trials in severe sepsis and septic shock statistically disadvantaged by repeated inadvertent underestimates of required sample size?
OBJECTIVES: We sought to understand why randomised controlled trials in septic shock have failed to demonstrate effectiveness in the face of improving overall outcomes for patients and seemingly promising results of early phase trials of interventions. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis o...
Autores principales: | Wong, Joshua L C, Mason, Alexina J, Gordon, Anthony C, Brett, Stephen J |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6119416/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30158216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020068 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Protocol for a randomised controlled trial of VAsopressin versus Noradrenaline as Initial therapy in Septic sHock (VANISH)
por: Gordon, Anthony C, et al.
Publicado: (2014) -
Fluids in Sepsis and Septic Shock (FISSH): protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial
por: Rochwerg, Bram, et al.
Publicado: (2017) -
Effect of levosimendan on mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomised trials
por: Chang, Wei, et al.
Publicado: (2018) -
Vitamin C therapy for patients with sepsis or septic shock: a protocol for a systematic review and a network meta-analysis
por: Fujii, Tomoko, et al.
Publicado: (2019) -
Effect of early goal-directed therapy on mortality in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
por: Yu, Hong, et al.
Publicado: (2016)