Cargando…
How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
OBJECTIVES: “Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016” provides guidelines in regard to prompt management and resuscitation of sepsis or septic shock. The study is aimed to assess the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that fo...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34316171 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895 |
_version_ | 1783723715740041216 |
---|---|
author | Choupoo, Nang S Das, Saurabh K Saikia, Priyam Dey, Samarjit Ray, Sumit |
author_facet | Choupoo, Nang S Das, Saurabh K Saikia, Priyam Dey, Samarjit Ray, Sumit |
author_sort | Choupoo, Nang S |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: “Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016” provides guidelines in regard to prompt management and resuscitation of sepsis or septic shock. The study is aimed to assess the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that formulate these guidelines in terms of fragility index and reverse fragility index. METHOD: RCTs that contributed to these guidelines having parallel two-group design, 1:1 allocation ratio, and at least one dichotomous outcome were included in the study. The median fragility index was calculated for RCTs with significant statistical outcomes, whereas the median reverse fragility index was calculated for RCTs with nonsignificant statistical results. RESULTS: Hundred RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The median fragility index was 5.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1–30] and median reverse fragility index was 13 (95% CI 12.07–16.8) at a p value of 0.05. The median reverse fragility index was 16 (95% CI 10–26) at a p value of 0.01. Most of the RCTs included in this analysis were of good quality, having a median Jadad score of 6. CONCLUSION: This analysis found that the surviving sepsis guidelines were based on highly robust RCTs with statistically insignificant results and on some moderately robust RCTs with statistically significant results. RCTs with statistically insignificant results were more robust than RCTs with statistically significant results in regard to these guidelines. HIGHLIGHTS: The study assessed the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were used to formulate surviving sepsis guidelines. Most RCTs showed statistically nonsignificant results. RCTs with statistically significant results were moderately fragile whereas RCTs with nonsignificant results were more robust. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Choupoo NS, Das SK, Saikia P, Dey S, Ray S. How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(7):773–779. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8286372 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82863722021-07-26 How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines Choupoo, Nang S Das, Saurabh K Saikia, Priyam Dey, Samarjit Ray, Sumit Indian J Crit Care Med Original Article OBJECTIVES: “Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016” provides guidelines in regard to prompt management and resuscitation of sepsis or septic shock. The study is aimed to assess the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that formulate these guidelines in terms of fragility index and reverse fragility index. METHOD: RCTs that contributed to these guidelines having parallel two-group design, 1:1 allocation ratio, and at least one dichotomous outcome were included in the study. The median fragility index was calculated for RCTs with significant statistical outcomes, whereas the median reverse fragility index was calculated for RCTs with nonsignificant statistical results. RESULTS: Hundred RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The median fragility index was 5.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1–30] and median reverse fragility index was 13 (95% CI 12.07–16.8) at a p value of 0.05. The median reverse fragility index was 16 (95% CI 10–26) at a p value of 0.01. Most of the RCTs included in this analysis were of good quality, having a median Jadad score of 6. CONCLUSION: This analysis found that the surviving sepsis guidelines were based on highly robust RCTs with statistically insignificant results and on some moderately robust RCTs with statistically significant results. RCTs with statistically insignificant results were more robust than RCTs with statistically significant results in regard to these guidelines. HIGHLIGHTS: The study assessed the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were used to formulate surviving sepsis guidelines. Most RCTs showed statistically nonsignificant results. RCTs with statistically significant results were moderately fragile whereas RCTs with nonsignificant results were more robust. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Choupoo NS, Das SK, Saikia P, Dey S, Ray S. How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(7):773–779. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8286372/ /pubmed/34316171 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895 Text en Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers. 2021 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Choupoo, Nang S Das, Saurabh K Saikia, Priyam Dey, Samarjit Ray, Sumit How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines |
title | How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines |
title_full | How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines |
title_fullStr | How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines |
title_full_unstemmed | How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines |
title_short | How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines |
title_sort | how robust are the evidences that formulate surviving sepsis guidelines? an analysis of fragility and reverse fragility of randomized controlled trials that were referred in these guidelines |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34316171 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT choupoonangs howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines AT dassaurabhk howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines AT saikiapriyam howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines AT deysamarjit howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines AT raysumit howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines |