The role of a journal in a scientific controversy

Clinical research in critical care. Difficulties and perspectives

In the field of Intensive Care Medicine, improved survival has resulted from better patient care, the early detection of clinical deterioration, and the prevention of iatrogenic complications, while research on new treatments has been followed by an overwhelming number of disappointments. The origins of these fiascos must be sought in the conjunction of methodological problems - common to other disciplines - and the particularities of critically ill patients. The present article discusses both aspects and suggests some options for progress.

A bibliometric search of citation classics in anesthesiology

BACKGROUND

Articles cited counts are catalogued and help identify landmark papers. This study provides a citation classics of anesthesiology literature using the framework of subspecialties to provide a review of well-developed areas of research in anesthesiology.

METHODS

A comprehensive list of the most-cited articles in anesthesia was compiled using a bibliometric database and general search terms such as "anesthesia" as well as subspecialty-specific search terms. Queries were reviewed for relevance to anesthesiology practice, categorized by subspecialty, and ranked according to their citation counts.

RESULTS

The database resulted in 2519 articles published between 1945 and 2008. The specialty areas most represented were chronic pain medicine (11%), pharmacology (9%), and pain sciences (9%).

CONCLUSIONS

This citations classic allows for advances in anesthesiology and its subspecialties to be highlighted as well to provide useful manuscripts to guide patient care, direct future research, and serve as sources for future academic pursuit.

The most influential articles in critical care medicine

Purpose

The study aimed to examine query strategies that would provide an exhaustive search method to retrieve the most referenced articles within specific categories of critical care.

Material and Methods

A comprehensive list of the most cited critical care medicine articles was generated by searching the Science Citation Index Expanded data set using general critical care terms keywords such as “critical care,” critical care journal titles, and keywords for subsubjects of critical care.

Results

The final database included 1187 articles published between 1905 and 2006. The most cited article was referenced 4909 times. The most productive search term was intensive care. However, this term only retrieved 25% of the top 100 articles. Furthermore, 662 of the top 1000 articles could not be found using any of the basic critical care search terms. Sepsis, acute lung injury, and mechanical ventilation were the most common areas of focus for the articles retrieved.

Conclusion

Retrieving frequently cited, influential articles in critical care requires using multiple search terms and manuscript sources. Periodic compilations of most cited articles may be useful for critical care practitioners and researches to keep abreast of important information.

Better conduct of clinical trials: the control group in critical care trials

OBJECTIVE

To review trial design issues related to control groups.

DESIGN

Review of the literature with specific reference to critical care trials.

MAIN RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Performing randomized controlled trials in the critical care setting presents specific problems: studies include patients with rapidly lethal conditions, the majority of intensive care patients suffer from syndromes rather than from well-definable diseases, the severity of such syndromes cannot be precisely assessed, and the treatment consists of interacting therapies. Interactions between physiology, pathophysiology, and therapies are at best marginally understood and may have a major impact on study design and interpretation of results. Selection of the right control group is crucial for the interpretation and clinical implementation of results. Studies comparing new interventions with current ones or different levels of current treatments have the problem of the necessity of defining "usual care." Usual care controls without any constraints typically include substantial heterogeneity. Constraints in the usual therapy may help to reduce some variation. Inclusion of unrestricted usual care groups may help to enhance safety. Practice misalignment is a novel problem in which patients receive a treatment that is the direct opposite of usual care, and occurs when fixed-dose interventions are used in situations where care is normally titrated. Practice misalignment should be considered in the design and interpretation of studies on titrated therapies.

Why are clinicians not embracing the results from pivotal clinical trials in severe sepsis? A bayesian analysis

BACKGROUND

Five pivotal clinical trials (Intensive Insulin Therapy; Recombinant Human Activated Protein C [rhAPC]; Low-Tidal Volume; Low-Dose Steroid; Early Goal-Directed Therapy [EGDT]) demonstrated mortality reduction in patients with severe sepsis and expert guidelines have recommended them to clinical practice. Yet, the adoption of these therapies remains low among clinicians.

OBJECTIVES

We selected these five trials and asked: Question 1--What is the current probability that the new therapy is not better than the standard of care in my patient with severe sepsis? Question 2--What is the current probability of reducing the relative risk of death (RRR) of my patient with severe sepsis by meaningful clinical thresholds (RRR >15%; >20%; >25%)?

METHODS

Bayesian methodologies were applied to this study. Odds ratio (OR) was considered for Question 1, and RRR was used for Question 2. We constructed prior distributions (enthusiastic; mild, moderate, and severe skeptic) based on various effective sample sizes of other relevant clinical trials (unfavorable evidence). Posterior distributions were calculated by combining the prior distributions and the data from pivotal trials (favorable evidence).

MAIN FINDINGS

Answer 1--The analysis based on mild skeptic prior shows beneficial results with the Intensive Insulin, rhAPC, and Low-Tidal Volume trials, but not with the Low-Dose Steroid and EGDT trials. All trials' results become unacceptable by the analyses using moderate or severe skeptic priors. Answer 2--If we aim for a RRR>15%, the mild skeptic analysis shows that the current probability of reducing death by this clinical threshold is 88% for the Intensive Insulin, 62-65% for the Low-Tidal Volume, rhAPC, EGDT trials, and 17% for the Low-Dose Steroid trial. The moderate and severe skeptic analyses show no clinically meaningful reduction in the risk of death for all trials. If we aim for a RRR >20% or >25%, all probabilities of benefits become lower independent of the degree of skepticism.

CONCLUSIONS

Our clinical threshold analysis offers a new bedside tool to be directly applied to the care of patients with severe sepsis. Our results demonstrate that the strength of evidence (statistical and clinical) is weak for all trials, particularly for the Low-Dose Steroid and EGDT trials. It is essential to replicate the results of each of these five clinical trials in confirmatory studies if we want to provide patient care based on scientifically sound evidence.

Positive pressure therapy: a perspective on evidence-based outcomes and methods of application

The sleep medicine community has increasingly recognized the necessity that clinical care be based on high-quality levels of evidence. Although research supports a favorable influence of positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy on risk for significant adverse outcomes in patients with severe obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea (OSAH), well-designed trials are still required to elucidate the effect of PAP on health, quality of life, and economic risks in patients with milder OSAH. Similarly, although there is strong evidence supporting various PAP titration strategies and PAP modalities in patients with severe OSAH without significant medical and psychiatric comorbidities, there is insufficient high-level evidence assessing and comparing the clinical efficacy and health care cost implications of various titration paradigms and various PAP modalities in individuals with milder OSAH and those with comorbid conditions. For ethical and other reasons, it may not be possible to apply a randomized controlled design to address all questions. However, whichever design is employed, it must be rigorously developed with attention to all potential confounders with adequate power to provide compelling, high-quality evidence.

The use of the World Wide Web by medical journals in 2003 and 2005: an observational study

OBJECTIVES

The 2- to 6-page print journal article has been the standard for 200 years, yet this format severely limits the amount of detailed information that can be conveyed. The World Wide Web provides a low-cost option for posting extended text and supplementary information. It also can enhance the experience of journal editors, reviewers, readers, and authors through added functionality (eg, online submission and peer review, postpublication critique, and e-mail notification of table of contents.) Our aim was to characterize ways that journals were using the World Wide Web in 2005 and note changes since 2003.

METHODS

We analyzed the Web sites of 138 high-impact print journals in 3 ways. First, we compared the print and Web versions of March 2003 and 2005 issues of 28 journals (20 of which were randomly selected from the 138) to determine how often articles were published Web only and how often print articles were augmented by Web-only supplements. Second, we examined what functions were offered by each journal Web site. Third, for journals that offered Web pages for reader commentary about each article, we analyzed the number of comments and characterized these comments.

RESULTS

Fifty-six articles (7%) in 5 journals were Web only. Thirteen of the 28 journals had no supplementary online content. By 2005, several journals were including Web-only supplements in >20% of their papers. Supplementary methods, tables, and figures predominated. The use of supplementary material increased by 5% from 2% to 7% in the 20-journal random sample from 2003 to 2005. Web sites had similar functionality with an emphasis on linking each article to related material and e-mailing readers about activity related to each article. There was little evidence of journals using the Web to provide readers an interactive experience with the data or with each other. Seventeen of the 138 journals offered rapid-response pages. Only 18% of eligible articles had any comments after 5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Journal Web sites offer similar functionality. The use of online-only articles and online-only supplements is increasing.

The acute respiratory distress syndrome network controversy: lessons and legacy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several of the Acute Respiratory Disease Syndrome Network clinical trials embrace a clinical trial design that evaluates contrasting strategies, one or both of which represents only a segment of standard practices. Such a trial design has engendered ethical controversy regarding the value of such trials and their ability to protect human subjects. During the past year, commentators have continued to reflect on the significance of such trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several authors have reflected on the ethical significance of the standard of care in clinical trial design and have offered a framework for determining control group selection in critical care trials. Other authors have written on methodologic issues and approaches to determine whether control groups are reflective of standard practices. Surveys have been performed to determine the impact and hence the relevancy of the Acute Respiratory Disease Syndrome Network tidal volume trial on clinical practice.

SUMMARY

The controversy related to and the impact of the Acute Respiratory Disease Syndrome Network clinical trial design on clinical practice offer an opportunity to explore the trade-offs between explanatory and pragmatic types of clinical trials. Such discussions will lead to a clearer understanding of the value of both types of clinical trials and the optimal ethical conduct of such trials.

Clinical trial of a weaning protocol

Krishnan and colleagues have conducted a prospective clinical trial of a weaning strategy previously demonstrated to enhance clinical outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients. They draw conclusions quite different from those drawn in an accompanying editorial. Krishnan and colleagues compared the outcomes of patients supported with mechanical ventilation for at least 24 hours. The outcome of those patients weaned from mechanical ventilation was compared with the outcome of those patients who received usual care. Although usual care was not defined, it was delivered in an unusual environment that included many systems improvement elements previously demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes. The investigators worked in a closed intensive care unit that employed large numbers of physicians (six residents, two postdoctoral fellows, and two attending physicians for a 14-bed unit), and used a structured standard checklist to make patient review during rounds more systematic. These features might reduce the difference in outcome between the protocol group and other patients in their unit. In addition, the experimental design allowed convergence of the method of care of protocol group patients with the method of care of other patients. Their results are compatible with either no effect of the protocol or with an inability to demonstrate the effect of the protocol because of the systems improvement elements in operation in their intensive care unit.