Comments on “Negative trials in critical care: why most research is probably wrong”

This paper, in which John Laffey and Brian Kavanagh discuss some of the issues in critical care trials, was published recently in Lancet Respiratory Diseases.  Their main point, which seems sound, is that one of the reasons for the large number of "negative" (urgh) trials in critical care is that conditions that conditions that trials … Continue reading Comments on “Negative trials in critical care: why most research is probably wrong”

New England Journal of Medicine for the last time

Sorry for going on yet again about the New England Journal of Medicine, but I recently had the experience of publishing a trial there (this one) and interacting with their statistical guidelines, which I have discussed before (here and here). The issue about p-values for baseline characteristics came up, of course.  Here's what came back … Continue reading New England Journal of Medicine for the last time

Cool

This is about the THAPCA trial, published in NEJM in 2015 (paper here) .  It’s a trial of hypothermia after paediatric cardiac arrest, randomising children aged between 2 days and 18 years to either normothermia or hypothermia, started within 6 hours of return of circulation.  First of all, let me say that’s a challenging trial, … Continue reading Cool

NEJM again

Some time ago I wrote a post complaining that the New England Journal of Medicine was promoting testing of baseline characteristics in randomised trials, in their Instructions for Authors (post is here).  After I wrote that I wondered if I was being fair; it could possibly refer to comparisons of outcomes, not baseline characteristics. The … Continue reading NEJM again