Literature DB >> 25623087

Completeness of main outcomes across randomized trials in entire discipline: survey of chronic lung disease outcomes in preterm infants.

John P A Ioannidis1, Jeffrey D Horbar2, Colleen M Ovelman3, Yolanda Brosseau3, Kristian Thorlund4, Madge E Buus-Frank5, Edward J Mills6, Roger F Soll7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To map the availability of information on a major clinical outcome--chronic lung disease--across the randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews of an entire specialty, specifically interventions in preterm infants.
DESIGN: Survey of systematic reviews. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. STUDY SELECTION AND METHODS: All Cochrane systematic reviews (as of November 2013) that had evaluated interventions in preterm infants. We identified how many of those systematic reviews had looked for information on chronic lung disease, how many reported on chronic lung disease, and how many of the randomized controlled trials included in the systematic reviews reported on chronic lung disease. We also randomly selected 10 systematic reviews that did not report on chronic lung disease and 10 that reported on any such outcomes and identified whether any information on chronic lung disease appeared in the primary reports of the randomized controlled trials but not in the systematic reviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether availability of chronic lung disease outcomes differed by type of population and intervention and whether additional non-extracted data might have been available in trial reports.
RESULTS: 174 systematic reviews with 1041 trials exclusively concerned preterm infants. Of those, 105 reviews looked for chronic lung disease outcomes, and 79 reported on these outcomes. Of the 1041 included trials, 202 reported on chronic lung disease at 28 days and 200 at 36 weeks postmenstrual; 320 reported on chronic lung disease with any definition. The proportion of systematic reviews that looked for or reported on chronic lung disease and the proportion of trials that reported on chronic lung disease was larger in preterm infants with respiratory distress or support than others (P<0.001) and differed across interventions (P<0.001). Even for trials on children with ventilation interventions, only 56% (48/86) reported on chronic lung disease. In the random sample, 45 of 84 trials (54%) had no outcomes on chronic lung disease in the systematic reviews, and only 9/45 (20%) had such information in the primary trial reports.
CONCLUSIONS: Most trials included in systematic reviews of interventions on preterm infants are missing information on one of the most common serious outcomes in this population. Use of standardized clinical outcomes that would have to be collected and reported by default in all trials in a given specialty should be considered. © Ioannidis et al 2015.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25623087     DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h72

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  11 in total

1.  The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 4.911

Review 2.  Clinical trials and systematic reviews addressing similar interventions for the same condition do not consider similar outcomes to be important: a case study in HIV/AIDS.

Authors:  Ian J Saldanha; Tianjing Li; Cui Yang; Jill Owczarzak; Paula R Williamson; Kay Dickersin
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  Surfactant instillation in spontaneously breathing preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Vincent Rigo; Caroline Lefebvre; Isabelle Broux
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2016-09-27       Impact factor: 3.183

4.  Social network analysis identified central outcomes for core outcome sets using systematic reviews of HIV/AIDS.

Authors:  Ian J Saldanha; Tianjing Li; Cui Yang; Cesar Ugarte-Gil; George W Rutherford; Kay Dickersin
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy: state of the evidence from a systematic review of randomised trials.

Authors:  Daniel E Roth; Michael Leung; Elnathan Mesfin; Huma Qamar; Jessica Watterworth; Eszter Papp
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-11-29

6.  Patient-important outcomes in systematic reviews: Poor quality of evidence.

Authors:  Youri Yordanov; Agnes Dechartres; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Automated Identification of Common Disease-Specific Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research Using ClinicalTrials.gov: Algorithm Development and Validation Study.

Authors:  Joseph Finkelstein; Anas Elghafari
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2021-02-08

8.  A Core Outcome Set for Evaluation of Interventions to Prevent Preterm Birth.

Authors:  Janneke van 't Hooft; James M N Duffy; Mandy Daly; Paula R Williamson; Shireen Meher; Elizabeth Thom; George R Saade; Zarko Alfirevic; Ben Willem J Mol; Khalid S Khan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Transplantation: A Global Initiative to Develop a Core Outcome Set for Trials in Kidney Transplantation.

Authors:  Allison Tong; Klemens Budde; John Gill; Michelle A Josephson; Lorna Marson; Timothy L Pruett; Peter P Reese; David Rosenbloom; Lionel Rostaing; Anthony N Warrens; Germaine Wong; Jonathan C Craig; Sally Crowe; Tess Harris; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Braden Manns; Peter Tugwell; Wim Van Biesen; David C Wheeler; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Nicole Evangelidis; Benedicte Sautenet; Martin Howell; Jeremy R Chapman
Journal:  Transplant Direct       Date:  2016-05-19

10.  Usefulness of Cochrane Reviews in Clinical Guideline Development-A Survey of 585 Recommendations.

Authors:  Christoffer Bruun Korfitsen; Marie-Louise Kirkegaard Mikkelsen; Anja Ussing; Karen Christina Walker; Jeanett Friis Rohde; Henning Keinke Andersen; Simon Tarp; Mina Nicole Händel
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.