Optimizing blood pressure in acute intracerebral hemorrhage: protocol for a prospective individual participant data meta-analysis of the four INTERACT trials
Wang, X.; Ren, X.; Li, Q.; Ouyang, M.; Chen, C.; Delcourt, C.; Chen, X.; Wang, J.; Robinson, T.; Arima, H.; Ma, L.; Hu, X.; You, C.; Li, G.; Yang, J.; Lin, Y.; Billot, L.; Venturelli, P.; Martins, S.; Pontes-Neto, O.; Liu, L.; Chalmers, J.; Song, L.; Anderson, C. S.
Show abstract
The Optimising Blood Pressure in acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) study aims to conduct an IPDMA of pooling the four INTERACT trial to provide reliable information on the optimal blood pressure (BP) treatment target for patients with acute ICH. This protocol outlines the methods for the systematic review, research questions, and the approach to statistical analysis. An intention-to-treat principle (ITT) will be applied in all analyses. Baseline characteristics will be summarised by treatment group. BP lowering treatment effect on the outcomes will be analysed by means of an ordinal logistic regression, and on the secondary and safety outcomes will be analysed by means of a binary logistic regression. Primary outcome is an ordinal distribution of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores at 90 days; secondary outcomes include change (absolute and relative, defined as an increase by >33%) in hematoma volume from the baseline and 24 hours CT scans and safety events within 90 days. Publication policyThis policy is to be inclusive and follows that outlined for a prospective meta-analysis.1 This policy requires the identification of the lead investigator responsible for each randomized controlled trial (RCT) - known as a Principle Investigator (PI)- as well as up to four additional investigators from each RCT, members of the Trial Management Group or Trial Steering Committee for each RCT, and the methodologists/statisticians involved in the meta-analysis. ProtocolUp to five investigators from each INTERACT trial may be included as co-authors of this protocol if they fulfil the ICMJE criteria of contributing authors, and they will be listed alphabetically by surname. The methodologists and statisticians involved in the design of INTERACT individual participant data meta-analysis will be co-authors. Each RCT may provide an unlimited number of non-author contributors, who are most likely to be members of each RCTs Trial Management Group or Trial Steering Committee. The criteria for determining who is a contributing author or a non-author contributor follow ICMJE definitions: www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html. All publications will name contributing authors as well as the attribution, "on behalf of the INTERACT collaborators." Any report of the INTERACT IPDMA will be circulated to co-authors for comment and approval before submission for publication. All co-authors must have participated fully in manuscript preparation and editing.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Reporting of Retrospective Registration in Clinical Trial Publications 93%
- Real-world effects of ACE inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers: protocol for an emulation study of the ONTARGET trial using electronic health records 93%
- CATALYST trial protocol: A multicentre, open-label, phase II, multi-arm trial for an early and accelerated evaluation of the potential treatments for COVID-19 in hospitalised adults 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effect of Time to Thrombolysis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke Treated with Tenecteplase Compared to Alteplase: Analysis from the AcT Randomized Controlled Trial 94%
- Intracerebral Hemorrhage Outcomes after Reversal of Subtherapeutic Warfarin: Analysis of Data from GWTG-Stroke 93%
- Prospective Observational Cohort Study Of Tenecteplase Versus Alteplase In Routine Clinical Practice 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Central Retinal Artery Occlusion: Protocol For a Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials 95%
- Non-invasive Auricular Vagus nerve stimulation for Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (NAVSaH): Protocol for a prospective, triple-blinded, randomized controlled trial 94%
- Laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection triggers for acute myocardial infarction and stroke: systematic review protocol 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Smoking does not alter treatment effect of intravenous thrombolysis in mild to moderate acute ischemic stroke; a Dutch String-of-Pearls Institute (PSI) Stroke Study 92%
- Workflow Intervals andOutcomesof Endovascular Treatment for Acute Large-Vessel Occlusion During On- Versus Off-Hours in China The ANGEL-ACT Registry 91%
- Efficacy of Simultaneous Infusion of Tirofiban with Intravenous Thrombolysis in Patients with Acute Anterior Choroidal or Paramedian Pontine Infarction: TITACIPPI Study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Hydroxyurea Therapy for Neurological and Cognitive Protection in Pediatric Sickle Cell Anemia in Uganda (BRAIN SAFE II): Protocol for a single-arm open label trial 93%
- The IGNITE Trial: Participant Recruitment Lessons Prior to SARS-CoV-2 91%
- Erroneous risks in pharmaceutical versus non-pharmaceutical interventions during data extraction in evidence synthesis practice: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.