Natural history, trajectory, and management of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients in the United Kingdom
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.10.20226688: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethical approval: The United Kingdom Health Research Authority determined that the study be exempt from review by an NHS Research Ethics Committee. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable For age, the odds ratio is the risk increase per decade increase; for SOFA scores, the odds ratio is the risk increase per unit increase in the SOFA score; and for binary variables (e.g., gender, comorbidities) the odds ratio is the risk increase of being positive (e.g. being male, having comorbidity). Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data were extracted from either electronic … SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.10.20226688: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethical approval: The United Kingdom Health Research Authority determined that the study be exempt from review by an NHS Research Ethics Committee. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable For age, the odds ratio is the risk increase per decade increase; for SOFA scores, the odds ratio is the risk increase per unit increase in the SOFA score; and for binary variables (e.g., gender, comorbidities) the odds ratio is the risk increase of being positive (e.g. being male, having comorbidity). Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data were extracted from either electronic healthcare records (EHRs) or paper-based records into the COVID-ICU secure REDCap database (REDCap v10.0.10; Vanderbilt University, US) REDCapsuggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)Analyses were carried out using MATLAB (MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA). MATLABsuggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Strengths and Limitations: There are clear limitations of this analysis, not least its observational, retrospective nature, with testing not standardized across sites, and some sites not being able to complete all data for all patients. For instance, we have not included an analysis between sites and have focussed on the physiology and progression of patients solely undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID-19. In contrast, to many studies with a focus on all hospitalised patients we chose to focus on patients undergoing mechanical ventilation as this remains a key defining criteria for admission to ICU as well as a decision for active treatment 16,35. Further limitations include bias towards ICUs that could contribute data and 38% of patients were managed in specialist severe acute respiratory failure centres often out of necessity as these centres saw a significant number of capacity related transfers (34%). Information censuring because of death or improvement may result in bias in the longitudinal data, but only patients with continuous data for the first 7 days were included in these analyses. Long-term outcome (e.g. 60-/90-day mortality) were not captured as this was not the focus of this analysis. However, the UK Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) 17 report that most deaths (88.7%) and ICU discharges (79.6%) occurred before day 30 whereas most acute hospital discharges (82%) occurred between days 60 and 90. This is not dissimilar to o...
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 34. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.10.20226688: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethical approval: The United Kingdom Health Research Authority determined that the study be exempt from review by an NHS Research Ethics Committee. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable Higher age and male gender independently predicted non-resolution in the first week of IMV. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data were extracted from either electronic healthcare records (EHRs) or paper-based records into the COVID-ICU secure REDCap database (REDCap v10.0.10; Vanderbilt University, REDCapsuggested: …SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.10.20226688: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Ethical approval: The United Kingdom Health Research Authority determined that the study be exempt from review by an NHS Research Ethics Committee. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable Higher age and male gender independently predicted non-resolution in the first week of IMV. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data were extracted from either electronic healthcare records (EHRs) or paper-based records into the COVID-ICU secure REDCap database (REDCap v10.0.10; Vanderbilt University, REDCapsuggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)Analyses were carried out using MATLAB (MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA). MATLABsuggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
Strengths and Limitations There are clear limitations of this analysis, not least its observational, retrospective nature, with testing not standardized across sites, and some sites not being able to complete all data for all patients. Hence, we have not included an analysis between sites and have focussed on the physiology and progression of patients solely undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID19. In contrast, to many studies with a focus on all hospitalised patients we chose to focus on patients undergoing mechanical ventilation as this remains a key defining criteria for admission to ICU as well as a decision for active treatment 21,30. Further limitations include bias towards ICUs that could contribute data and 38% of patients were managed in specialist severe acute respiratory failure centres often out of necessity as these centres saw a significant number of capacity related transfers (34%). Finally, patients progressing to ECMO were excluded due to the lack of data prior to ECMO support. Regarding strengths, we opted for a twice daily collection of data in contrast to a worst daily value, to appreciate the progression of disease and impact of complex interventions. The novelty of this analysis is the utilisation of routinely measured clinical physiological and laboratory parameters over time to determine trajectories and application of interventions. Furthermore, we obtained the most complete ICU dataset published thus far with most data missingness like...
Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:
Identifier Status Title NCT04379076 Recruiting InterLeukin-7 (CYT107) to Improve Clinical Outcomes in Lymph... Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap used on page 27. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.
About SciScore
SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.
-