EUVIMEDEuropean Health Evidence
Uhr Sources10/10 Journal Tree
Easy Demo

European Health Evidence

The European alternative to PubMed

EUVIMED is the European alternative to PubMed: a central, multilingual research platform for medicine, nursing, life sciences and healthcare. It brings together international and European literature sources, study registries, open-access full texts, citations and retraction notices in one search. Unlike pure bibliographic databases, EUVIMED supports the entire research process – from discovery and appraisal with LIVIA and CLARA to traceable evidence synthesis. European in focus, transparent, interoperable and designed for science and healthcare.

EuropeanMultilingualInteroperableTraceable

EUVIMED BETA

EUVIMED is currently in beta

EUVIMED is under continuous development. Features, data coverage and presentation may change or be temporarily incomplete.

Results are beta

Search results, classifications, summaries and AI-assisted assessments may be incomplete, delayed or incorrect.

Check original sources

Do not use EUVIMED results without verification for diagnosis, treatment or other clinical decisions. Always consult the original source and applicable guidelines.

Errors and feedback help us improve EUVIMED: info@euvimed.com

Lokaler Crossref-Datenbestand · journal-article

Ethical and Methodological Features of Cluster Randomized Trials in Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Eric Walser, Cory E. Goldstein, Julia F. Shaw, Hana Geres, Alla Iansavitchene, Kusum Menon, Simon Pupulin, Marat Slessarev, Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer

Critical Care Medicine · 2026

Vollständiger Abstract

Worum geht es in dieser Arbeit?

Objectives: Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are useful for evaluating system-level interventions in critical care but raise complex ethical and methodological issues that are amplified in this setting. We aimed to describe ethical and methodological features of CRTs in critical care settings. Data Sources: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE and Embase. Study Selection: We included primary reports of CRTs in critical care settings published from 2004 to 2022 in English. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data from each CRT, resolving any discrepancies by consensus. Data Synthesis: Among 102 CRTs, 77 CRTs (78%) reported trial registration and 101 CRTs (99%) reported research ethics committee review; five CRTs (5%) were exempted from review. Common designs were parallel-arm (48, 47%), two-period crossover (23, 23%), stepped-wedge (20, 20%), and multi-period crossover (8, 8%). A justification for using cluster randomization was provided in 47 CRTs (46%). Patients and caregivers were identified as research participants in 99 CRTs (97%). Of these, 74 CRTs (75%) reported on consent, which was most commonly waived consent (36, 49%). Healthcare providers were identified as research participants in 48 CRTs (47%). Of these, 11 CRTs (23%) reported on consent. Most (82, 80%) reported a sample size or power calculation, with 67 CRTs (82%) accounting for the intracluster correlation; 77 CRTs (76%) accounted for the intracluster correlation in the primary analysis. Among 85 CRTs with fewer than 40 clusters, 11 CRTs (13%) reported a small sample correction. Conclusions: Ethical and methodological shortcomings persist in CRTs. Enhanced reporting standards and adherence to established ethical frameworks, including the Ottawa Statement , are needed to ensure both scientific and ethical integrity in this essential design in critical care research.

Bibliografischer Nachweis

Publikationsdaten

Autor:innen
Eric Walser, Cory E. Goldstein, Julia F. Shaw, Hana Geres, Alla Iansavitchene, Kusum Menon, Simon Pupulin, Marat Slessarev, Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer
Quelle
Critical Care Medicine
Publikation
2026-01-01
Band / Ausgabe
Nicht angegeben
Seiten
Nicht angegeben
ISSN / ISBN
0090-3493, 1530-0293
Zitationen
0 laut Crossref
Referenzen
0 hinterlegt

Zitieren

Zitierfähiger Nachweis

Eric Walser, Cory E. Goldstein, Julia F. Shaw, Hana Geres, Alla Iansavitchene, Kusum Menon, Simon Pupulin, Marat Slessarev, Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer (2026). Ethical and Methodological Features of Cluster Randomized Trials in Critical Care Settings: A Systematic Review. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000007340
RIS BibTeX CSL-JSON