• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估支持围手术期护理指南的随机对照试验的脆弱指数:方法学调查方案。

Assessing the fragility index of randomized controlled trials supporting perioperative care guidelines: A methodological survey protocol.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá D.C, Colombia.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2024 Sep 12;19(9):e0310092. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310092. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0310092
PMID:39264894
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11392262/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The Fragility Index (FI) and the FI family are statistical tools that measure the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCT) by examining how many patients would need a different outcome to change the statistical significance of the main results of a trial. These tools have recently gained popularity in assessing the robustness or fragility of clinical trials in many clinical areas and analyzing the strength of the trial outcomes underpinning guideline recommendations. However, it has not been applied to perioperative care Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG).

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to survey clinical practice guidelines in anesthesiology to determine the Fragility Index of RCTs supporting the recommendations, and to explore trial characteristics associated with fragility.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A methodological survey will be conducted using the targeted population of RCT referenced in the recommendations of the CPG of the North American and European societies from 2012 to 2022. FI will be assessed for statistically significant and non-significant trial results. A Poisson regression analysis will be used to explore factors associated with fragility.

DISCUSSION

This methodological survey aims to estimate the Fragility Index of RCTs supporting perioperative care guidelines published by North American and European societies of anesthesiology between 2012 and 2022. The results of this study will inform the methodological quality of RCTs included in perioperative care guidelines and identify areas for improvement.

摘要

简介

脆弱指数(FI)及其家族是统计学工具,通过检查需要多少患者出现不同的结果才能改变试验主要结果的统计学意义,来衡量随机对照试验(RCT)的稳健性。这些工具最近在许多临床领域评估临床试验的稳健性或脆弱性以及分析支持指南建议的试验结果的强度方面变得越来越受欢迎。然而,它尚未应用于围手术期护理临床实践指南(CPG)。

目的

本研究旨在调查麻醉学中的临床实践指南,以确定支持建议的 RCT 的脆弱指数,并探讨与脆弱性相关的试验特征。

方法和分析

将对 2012 年至 2022 年北美和欧洲社会的 CPG 建议中引用的 RCT 进行目标人群的方法学调查。将评估 FI 对统计学上显著和非显著试验结果的影响。将使用泊松回归分析来探讨与脆弱性相关的因素。

讨论

本方法学调查旨在估计 2012 年至 2022 年北美和欧洲麻醉学会发布的围手术期护理指南所支持的 RCT 的脆弱指数。该研究的结果将告知围手术期护理指南中包含的 RCT 的方法学质量,并确定需要改进的领域。

相似文献

1
Assessing the fragility index of randomized controlled trials supporting perioperative care guidelines: A methodological survey protocol.评估支持围手术期护理指南的随机对照试验的脆弱指数:方法学调查方案。
PLoS One. 2024 Sep 12;19(9):e0310092. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310092. eCollection 2024.
2
Fragility of results from randomized controlled trials supporting the guidelines for the treatment of osteoporosis: a retrospective analysis.随机对照试验结果的脆弱性支持骨质疏松症治疗指南:回顾性分析。
Osteoporos Int. 2021 Sep;32(9):1713-1723. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-05865-y. Epub 2021 Feb 17.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
5
Systematic Evaluation of the Robustness of the Evidence Supporting Current Guidelines on Myocardial Revascularization Using the Fragility Index.使用脆弱性指数对支持当前心肌血运重建指南的证据稳健性进行系统评价。
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 Dec;12(12):e006017. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.006017. Epub 2019 Dec 11.
6
The fragility index in randomized clinical trials supporting clinical practice guidelines for acute coronary syndrome: measuring robustness from a different perspective.随机临床试验中支持急性冠脉综合征临床实践指南的脆弱指数:从不同角度衡量稳健性。
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2023 Jun 2;12(6):386-390. doi: 10.1093/ehjacc/zuad021.
7
Levels of Evidence Supporting the North American and European Perioperative Care Guidelines for Anesthesiologists between 2010 and 2020: A Systematic Review.2010 年至 2020 年期间支持北美和欧洲麻醉医师围手术期护理指南的证据水平:系统评价。
Anesthesiology. 2021 Jul 1;135(1):31-56. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003808.
8
The Fragility Index in Randomized Clinical Trials as a Means of Optimizing Patient Care.随机临床试验中的脆弱指数作为优化患者护理的手段。
JAMA Surg. 2019 Jan 1;154(1):74-79. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.4318.
9
Are results from randomized trials in anesthesiology robust or fragile? An analysis using the fragility index.麻醉学随机试验的结果是否稳健或脆弱?使用脆弱指数进行分析。
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2020 Mar;18(1):116-124. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000200.
10
The Fragility Index of randomized controlled trials in pediatric anesthesiology.儿科麻醉学随机对照试验的脆弱性指数。
Can J Anaesth. 2023 Sep;70(9):1449-1460. doi: 10.1007/s12630-023-02513-3. Epub 2023 Jun 8.

引用本文的文献

1
How trustworthy and applicable is the evidence from systematic reviews of depression treatments: Protocol for systematic examination.抑郁症治疗系统评价的证据有多可靠及适用性如何:系统审查方案
PLoS One. 2025 Jun 6;20(6):e0325384. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325384. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
The fragility index in randomized clinical trials supporting clinical practice guidelines for acute coronary syndrome: measuring robustness from a different perspective.随机临床试验中支持急性冠脉综合征临床实践指南的脆弱指数:从不同角度衡量稳健性。
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2023 Jun 2;12(6):386-390. doi: 10.1093/ehjacc/zuad021.
2
Spin and fragility in randomised controlled trials in the anaesthesia literature: a systematic review.随机对照试验中的旋转和脆弱性:系统评价。
Br J Anaesth. 2023 May;130(5):528-535. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.01.001. Epub 2023 Feb 8.
3
Reverse Fragility Index in Negative Cardiac Procedural Randomized Controlled Trials.阴性心脏介入随机对照试验中的反向脆弱性指数
Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023;35(3):493-496. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2022.05.010. Epub 2022 May 26.
4
Fragility indices for only sufficiently likely modifications.仅针对极有可能发生的修饰的脆性指数。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Dec 7;118(49). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2105254118.
5
The fragility index can be used for sample size calculations in clinical trials.脆性指数可用于临床试验的样本量计算。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Nov;139:199-209. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.08.010. Epub 2021 Aug 15.
6
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.制定脓毒症存活指南的证据有多可靠?对这些指南中引用的随机对照试验的脆弱性和反脆弱性分析。
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2021 Jul;25(7):773-779. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895.
7
The fragility and reverse fragility indices of proximal humerus fracture randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.肱骨近端骨折随机对照试验的脆弱性和反向脆弱性指数:一项系统评价。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022 Dec;48(6):4545-4552. doi: 10.1007/s00068-021-01684-2. Epub 2021 May 31.
8
Levels of Evidence Supporting the North American and European Perioperative Care Guidelines for Anesthesiologists between 2010 and 2020: A Systematic Review.2010 年至 2020 年期间支持北美和欧洲麻醉医师围手术期护理指南的证据水平:系统评价。
Anesthesiology. 2021 Jul 1;135(1):31-56. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003808.
9
Evaluation of 'spin' in the abstracts and articles of randomized controlled trials in pain literature and general anesthesia.评价疼痛文献和全身麻醉中随机对照试验摘要和文章中的“spin”。
Pain Manag. 2021 Jan;11(1):23-28. doi: 10.2217/pmt-2020-0009. Epub 2020 Nov 11.
10
Fragility of clinical trials across research fields: A synthesis of methodological reviews.各研究领域临床试验的脆弱性:方法学综述的综合分析。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2020 Oct;97:106151. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2020.106151. Epub 2020 Sep 15.