首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Critical Care >Severe sepsis: are PROWESS and PROWESS-SHOCK trials comparable? A clinical and statistical heterogeneity analysis
【2h】

Severe sepsis: are PROWESS and PROWESS-SHOCK trials comparable? A clinical and statistical heterogeneity analysis

机译:严重败血症:PROWESS和PROWESS-SHOCK试验是否具有可比性?临床和统计异质性分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Despite the same manufacturer, the same drotrecogin alfa activated dose, and the same placebo-controlled design, the negative result from the PROWESS-SHOCK trial contradicted the survival benefit observed in the PROWESS trial. We hypothesize that the different results were due to factors other than the experimental therapy and performed an analysis of the clinical heterogeneity (differences related to the trials' clinical aspects) and the statistical heterogeneity (differences related to the trials' statistical aspects) between these trials. Baseline characteristics and co-interventions were analyzed by chi-square testing and mortality was analyzed by random-effects modeling and I2. Our findings show that clinical variables presented significant heterogeneity, and that up to 90% of the mortality differences between both trials were not due to chance. These results demonstrate that PROWESS and PROWESS-SHOCK are not comparable trials due to the highly significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity. We propose a new and pragmatic solution.
机译:尽管有相同的制造商,相同的drotrecogin alfa活化剂量和相同的安慰剂对照设计,但是PROWESS-SHOCK试验的阴性结果与PROWESS试验中观察到的生存获益相矛盾。我们假设不同的结果是由于实验疗法以外的因素引起的,并且对这些试验之间的临床异质性(与试验的临床方面相关的差异)和统计异质性(与试验的统计方面相关的差异)进行了分析。通过卡方检验分析基线特征和共同干预,并通过随机效应模型和I 2 分析死亡率。我们的发现表明,临床变量显示出显着的异质性,并且两次试验之间高达90%的死亡率差异并非由于偶然。这些结果表明,由于临床和统计学的高度异质性,PROWESS和PROWESS-SHOCK不是可比较的试验。我们提出了一种新的务实的解决方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号