Mechanical ventilation core outcome set uptake in Cochrane systematic reviews: A cross-sectional study

Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods Pub Date : 2024-01-10 DOI:10.1002/cesm.12038

Luis Garegnani, Diego Ivaldi, Mariana Burgos, Gisela Oltra, Camila M. Escobar Liquitay

{"title":"Mechanical ventilation core outcome set uptake in Cochrane systematic reviews: A cross-sectional study","authors":"Luis Garegnani, Diego Ivaldi, Mariana Burgos, Gisela Oltra, Camila M. Escobar Liquitay","doi":"10.1002/cesm.12038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>The Cochrane Handbook acknowledges core outcome sets' (COS) relevance in defining review questions and planning systematic reviews. We aimed to assess the uptake of the mechanical ventilation (MV) COS in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A cross-sectional study. We included Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols of Cochrane systematic reviews of any intervention related to mechanically ventilated patients through a search in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. We did not apply restrictions based on age or setting. One reviewer assessed the studies for eligibility and extracted data. Both processes were validated by a second author.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We identified 233 reviews and protocols through our search strategy. We finally included 36 records. Thirty-four (94.44%) were Cochrane reviews and two (5.56%) were protocols. The included Cochrane reviews and protocols assessed a median of 13 (interquartile range [IQR]: 9–17) outcomes, with 35 (97.22%) reviews reporting at least one outcome from the MV COS. The median number of outcomes from the MV COS reported in the Cochrane reviews and protocols was 2.5 (IQR: 2–3). Only one (2.78%) study reported all the outcomes from the MV COS. None of the included Cochrane reviews and protocols cited the MV COS publication.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Completed Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols of Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions related to mechanically ventilated patients have an overall limited uptake of the MV COS so far. Mortality and duration of stay were the most reported outcomes, while extubation and reintubation were the least informed. These findings may serve as a starting point for the Cochrane Critical Care community to develop dissemination strategies for improving the MV COS uptake.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100286,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cesm.12038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cesm.12038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The Cochrane Handbook acknowledges core outcome sets' (COS) relevance in defining review questions and planning systematic reviews. We aimed to assess the uptake of the mechanical ventilation (MV) COS in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions.

Methods

A cross-sectional study. We included Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols of Cochrane systematic reviews of any intervention related to mechanically ventilated patients through a search in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. We did not apply restrictions based on age or setting. One reviewer assessed the studies for eligibility and extracted data. Both processes were validated by a second author.

Results

We identified 233 reviews and protocols through our search strategy. We finally included 36 records. Thirty-four (94.44%) were Cochrane reviews and two (5.56%) were protocols. The included Cochrane reviews and protocols assessed a median of 13 (interquartile range [IQR]: 9–17) outcomes, with 35 (97.22%) reviews reporting at least one outcome from the MV COS. The median number of outcomes from the MV COS reported in the Cochrane reviews and protocols was 2.5 (IQR: 2–3). Only one (2.78%) study reported all the outcomes from the MV COS. None of the included Cochrane reviews and protocols cited the MV COS publication.

Conclusion

Completed Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols of Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions related to mechanically ventilated patients have an overall limited uptake of the MV COS so far. Mortality and duration of stay were the most reported outcomes, while extubation and reintubation were the least informed. These findings may serve as a starting point for the Cochrane Critical Care community to develop dissemination strategies for improving the MV COS uptake.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

机械通气核心结果集在 Cochrane 系统综述中的应用：横断面研究

引言 Cochrane 手册承认核心结果集（COS）在确定综述问题和规划系统综述中的相关性。我们的目的是评估机械通气 (MV) COS 在 Cochrane 干预系统综述中的应用情况。方法横向研究。我们通过在 Cochrane 系统综述数据库中进行检索，纳入了与机械通气患者相关的任何干预措施的 Cochrane 系统综述和 Cochrane 系统综述协议。我们没有根据年龄或环境进行限制。一名审稿人负责评估研究的资格并提取数据。这两个过程均由第二位作者验证。结果我们通过搜索策略确定了 233 篇综述和方案。我们最终收录了 36 条记录。其中 34 篇（94.44%）为 Cochrane 综述，2 篇（5.56%）为规程。纳入的科克伦综述和方案评估的结果中位数为 13 项（四分位数间距 [IQR]：9-17），其中 35 项（97.22%）综述报告了至少一项来自 MV COS 的结果。科克伦综述和规程中报告的中压COS结果的中位数为2.5（IQR：2-3）。只有一项研究（2.78%）报告了中压COS的所有结果。所有纳入的 Cochrane 综述和协议均未引用 MV COS 出版物。结论已完成的Cochrane系统综述和Cochrane系统综述协议中与机械通气患者相关的干预措施中，迄今为止对MV COS的总体吸收有限。死亡率和住院时间是报道最多的结果，而拔管和再插管则是报道最少的结果。这些发现可作为 Cochrane 重症医学界制定传播策略以提高 MV COS 使用率的起点。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods

自引率

0.00%

发文量