早产儿医学进展证据

Pamela K. Donahue, Karen A. Robinson
{"title":"早产儿医学进展证据","authors":"Pamela K. Donahue, Karen A. Robinson","doi":"10.1002/ddrr.125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Few interventions and treatments for premature infants have undergone the rigors of a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the cornerstone of evidence-based healthcare. Multiple barriers in establishing a quality evidence base for the care of preterm infants are examined including the systematic exclusion of children from drug trials, vulnerability of the infants, burden to families of the consent process for RCTs, and the lack of standard measurements and subgroup definitions that impede systematic reviews. Delays in getting evidence into practice are highlighted, including clinician knowledge of existing evidence, attitudes about the evidence, and behavior. Landmark trials are used as examples. Finally, a call for the research community to develop guidance on good clinical research practice for preterm infants is offered that will allow the synthesis of the totality of evidence.","PeriodicalId":55176,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews","volume":"16 4","pages":"289-295"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ddrr.125","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing evidence in preterm neonatal medicine\",\"authors\":\"Pamela K. Donahue, Karen A. Robinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ddrr.125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Few interventions and treatments for premature infants have undergone the rigors of a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the cornerstone of evidence-based healthcare. Multiple barriers in establishing a quality evidence base for the care of preterm infants are examined including the systematic exclusion of children from drug trials, vulnerability of the infants, burden to families of the consent process for RCTs, and the lack of standard measurements and subgroup definitions that impede systematic reviews. Delays in getting evidence into practice are highlighted, including clinician knowledge of existing evidence, attitudes about the evidence, and behavior. Landmark trials are used as examples. Finally, a call for the research community to develop guidance on good clinical research practice for preterm infants is offered that will allow the synthesis of the totality of evidence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews\",\"volume\":\"16 4\",\"pages\":\"289-295\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ddrr.125\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ddrr.125\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ddrr.125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

很少有针对早产儿的干预和治疗经过严格的随机对照试验(RCT),这是循证医疗保健的基石。在为早产儿护理建立高质量证据基础的过程中,研究人员检查了多种障碍,包括系统性地将儿童排除在药物试验之外、婴儿的脆弱性、随机对照试验同意过程对家庭的负担,以及缺乏标准测量和亚组定义,这些都阻碍了系统评价。将证据付诸实践的延迟被强调,包括临床医生对现有证据的知识、对证据的态度和行为。以具有里程碑意义的试验为例。最后,呼吁研究界为早产儿制定良好的临床研究实践指南,以便综合所有证据。©2011 Wiley期刊公司Dev disability Res 2010; 16:29 - 295。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Advancing evidence in preterm neonatal medicine
Few interventions and treatments for premature infants have undergone the rigors of a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the cornerstone of evidence-based healthcare. Multiple barriers in establishing a quality evidence base for the care of preterm infants are examined including the systematic exclusion of children from drug trials, vulnerability of the infants, burden to families of the consent process for RCTs, and the lack of standard measurements and subgroup definitions that impede systematic reviews. Delays in getting evidence into practice are highlighted, including clinician knowledge of existing evidence, attitudes about the evidence, and behavior. Landmark trials are used as examples. Finally, a call for the research community to develop guidance on good clinical research practice for preterm infants is offered that will allow the synthesis of the totality of evidence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Aging and intellectual disability: Insights from mouse models of down syndrome Aging in rare intellectual disability syndromes Health, functioning, and participation of adolescents and adults with cerebral palsy: A review of outcomes research Fragile X syndrome: An aging perspective Editorial: Special issue on adult development and aging with IDD
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1