Graphs and Gaffs
Matt Miller continued his ambitious mission to teach us all research methods in manageable 20 minute blocks. This month focussed on the use of graphs, using some amusing, published, graphs to illustrate how data can be misinterpreted if graphs are not presented correctly.
Key learnings were:
- Take care with your Y axis. It should include zero and the axis units need to be appropriate for the data being presented
- If using two graphs for comparison, the scale should be the same
- Make sure your graphs are not so busy that the message gets lost
- When reading a paper, make sure you understand how the data has been presented before drawing any conclusions
- Ensure you actually need a graph to illustrate a result. Sometimes text will do.
Give PEEP a chance (or not)
Das Ragavan presented an update on the use of PEEP in patients with ARDS by reviewing the recently published randomised clinical trial from the ART group. In summary, in patients with moderate-severe ARDS, a ventilation strategy with lung recruitment and titrated PEEP compared with low PEEP increased 28 day all-cause mortality. Routine use of lung recruitment and PEEP titration in this patient group was not recommended.
A link to the paper can be found here:
A reminder from Karel Habig that the state wide “Code Crimson” pathway is now live.
This pathway aims to standardise the:
- pre-hospital identification of a trauma ‘Code Crimson’
- activation of a trauma ‘Code Crimson’ pathway by pre-hospital medical retrieval teams and the subsequent notification to a receiving trauma centre
- procedures instituted by trauma centres following activation of a trauma ‘Code Crimson’ pathway.
The most relevant sections for our service list the criteria for activation and outline the activation procedure.
The entire pathway document can be found here.