scholarly journals Challenging orthodoxy in critical care trial design: physiological responsiveness

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. 147-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Aberegg
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Critical Care Trial

scholarly journals Critical care trial design and interpretation: A primer

2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. 1882-1889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan E. Sevransky ◽  
William Checkley ◽  
Greg S. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Critical Care Trial

Aligning Interests in Critical Care Trial Design*

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-177
Author(s):  
Ryan P. Barbaro ◽  
Michael Gaies
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Critical Care Trial

Physicians declining patient enrollment in a critical care trial: a case study in thromboprophylaxis

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 2115-2125 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Cook ◽  
◽  
Y. Arabi ◽  
N. D. Ferguson ◽  
D. Heels-Ansdell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Patient Enrollment ◽  
Critical Care Trial

scholarly journals Co-enrolment to UK Critical Care Studies – A 2019 update

2020 ◽  
pp. 175114372097154
Author(s):  
Timothy Felton ◽  
Natalie Pattison ◽  
Simon Fletcher ◽  
Simon Finney ◽  
Tim Walsh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Deferred Consent ◽  
Ventilation Weaning ◽  
Trial Outcomes ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Weaning ◽  
Short Time ◽  
Critical Care Trial

In 2013, a group of clinicians on behalf of the National Institute for Health Research, collaborated with ICU Steps to produce guidance about people being enrolled in more than one critical care trial. This is referred to as “co-enrolment” and can be where a person takes part in one study at the same time as another study (or one after the other in a short time-frame). For instance, being part of a study looking at sepsis drugs and a mechanical ventilation weaning study. The drivers for developing this guidance were a lack of any existing guidance, nationally and internationally, at that time, and a desire to ensure high quality research is conducted. The emphasis was on making trials as safe as possible for patients and ensuring robust trial outcomes. Critical care was seen to lead in this, with our exemplar guidance used across all health research. We wish to revisit this guidance now that there is more experience of coenrolment in critical care trials. There is also more awareness of different consent models, such as deferred consent (taking consent when a person is awake and able to give consent) and consultee consent (asking families or independent professionals to consent). Consenting to coenrolment is an important ethical consideration for the revision of this guidance.

scholarly journals Contemporary strategies to improve clinical trial design for critical care research: insights from the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists Workshop

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 930-942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael O. Harhay ◽  
Jonathan D. Casey ◽  
Marina Clement ◽  
Sean P. Collins ◽  
Étienne Gayat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Clinical Trial Design ◽  
Care Research

793: A Qualitative Analysis of Factors Influencing Critical Care Trial Enrollment Among Surrogates

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 393-393
Author(s):  
Dustin Krutsinger ◽  
Breanna Hetland ◽  
Kelly Oleary ◽  
Katherine Courtright
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Critical Care Trial

scholarly journals Promises and challenges of personalized medicine to guide ARDS therapy

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine D. Wick ◽  
Daniel F. McAuley ◽  
Joseph E. Levitt ◽  
Jeremy R. Beitler ◽  
Djillali Annane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Personalized Medicine ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Clinical Trial Design ◽  
First Century ◽  
Global Context ◽  
Patient Level

AbstractIdentifying new effective treatments for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including COVID-19 ARDS, remains a challenge. The field of ARDS investigation is moving increasingly toward innovative approaches such as the personalization of therapy to biological and clinical sub-phenotypes. Additionally, there is growing recognition of the importance of the global context to identify effective ARDS treatments. This review highlights emerging opportunities and continued challenges for personalizing therapy for ARDS, from identifying treatable traits to innovative clinical trial design and recognition of patient-level factors as the field of critical care investigation moves forward into the twenty-first century.

Difficulties in knowing which critical care trial data warrant change in practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 211 (7) ◽  
pp. 306
Author(s):  
Benjamin Reddi ◽  
Mark Finnis ◽  
Sandra Peake
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Trial Data ◽  
Change In Practice ◽  
Critical Care Trial
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document