Journal Club Summary

Methodology: 4/5
Usefulness: 4/5

Chu DK, et al. Lancet. 2018 Apr 28;391(10131):1693-1705.

Question & Methods: The authors wanted to summarize the best available evidence of RCTs to guide rational use of O2 therapy.

Findings: Their review of over 16 000 patients provides high-quality evidence that liberal supplemental O2 increases in-hospital mortality (RR1.21), mortality at 30 days (RR 1.14) and mortality at longest follow-up (RR1.10).

Limitations: Heterogeneity of definitions, un-blinded studies, and description of duration of therapy; practically, the density of the paper will likely limit its dissemination.

Interpretation: High-quality evidence indicates that liberal O2 increases mortality among a broad range of illnesses and that this likely has a dose response relationship; specific trials are needed to further clarify.

By: Dr. Shawn Chhabra

Epi Lesson – Clinical vs Statistical Heterogeneity

A meta-analysis may attempt to address a compelling clinical dilemma. One of the key questions to ask when appraising meta-analyses is whether the pooling of the included studies is appropriate. Clinical heterogeneity reflects clinical differences between study populations, the intervention, co-interventions and/or outcomes when pooling studies in meta-analysis. This is distinct from statistical heterogeneity which can be determined by visually assessing the forest plot, measuring the I2 statistic or the Cochran’s Q. Always ask yourself if the meta-analysis is combining apples with apples.

By: Dr. Lisa Calder 



  • Hans Rosenberg

    Dr. Rosenberg is an emergency physician at the Ottawa Hospital, assistant professor at the University of Ottawa, and Director of the Digital Scholarship and Knowledge Dissemination Program.

    View all posts