Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Bruschettini M, Schmölzer GM, Lai NM, Mitra S, Davis PG, Soll RF
    Neonatology, 2024 Aug 16.
    PMID: 39154644 DOI: 10.1159/000540604
  2. Gan KML, Oei JL, Quah-Smith I, Kamar AA, Lordudass AAD, Liem KD, et al.
    Front Pediatr, 2020;8:615008.
    PMID: 33425820 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2020.615008
    Background: Eye exam for Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a painful procedure and pharmacological analgesia might be ineffective. We hypothesized that magnetic auricular acupuncture (MAA) compared to placebo will decrease pain during ROP exam in preterm infants. Methods: Multicentre randomized controlled trial conducted in three hospitals (Australia, Canada, and Malaysia). Eligibility: >32 weeks, ROP exam, not sedated, and parental consent. A total of 100 infants were randomized (1:1) to MAA (n = 50) or placebo (n = 50). MAA stickers or placebo were placed on both ears by an unblinded investigator. Pain was assessed using the Premature Infant Pain Profile. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT03650621. Findings: The mean (standard deviation, SD) gestation, birthweight, and postnatal age were (MAA 28(3) vs. placebo 28(2) weeks; MAA 1,057(455) vs. placebo 952(273) g; MAA 7(3) vs. placebo 7(3) weeks. Placebo infants had significantly higher PIPP scores during [mean difference 1.6 points (95%CI 0.1-3.1)] and 1 h mean difference 1.5 points (95%CI 0.7-2.2) after the procedure (p < 0.03). Heart rate was lower (173(22) vs. 184(18)/min) and oxygen saturations were higher (93.8(6.2) vs. 91.7(6.1)%, p = 0.05) in MAA infants. No adverse effects. Interpretation: MAA may reduce physiological pain responses during and after ROP exam in preterm infants. Assessment of long-term effects are warranted. Clinical trial registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03650621.
  3. Baba A, Webbe J, Butcher NJ, Rodrigues C, Stallwood E, Goren K, et al.
    Pediatrics, 2023 Sep 01;152(3).
    PMID: 37641881 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2022-060751
    OBJECTIVES: Clear outcome reporting in clinical trials facilitates accurate interpretation and application of findings and improves evidence-informed decision-making. Standardized core outcomes for reporting neonatal trials have been developed, but little is known about how primary outcomes are reported in neonatal trials. Our aim was to identify strengths and weaknesses of primary outcome reporting in recent neonatal trials.

    METHODS: Neonatal trials including ≥100 participants/arm published between 2015 and 2020 with at least 1 primary outcome from a neonatal core outcome set were eligible. Raters recruited from Cochrane Neonatal were trained to evaluate the trials' primary outcome reporting completeness using relevant items from Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Outcomes 2022 pertaining to the reporting of the definition, selection, measurement, analysis, and interpretation of primary trial outcomes. All trial reports were assessed by 3 raters. Assessments and discrepancies between raters were analyzed.

    RESULTS: Outcome-reporting evaluations were completed for 36 included neonatal trials by 39 raters. Levels of outcome reporting completeness were highly variable. All trials fully reported the primary outcome measurement domain, statistical methods used to compare treatment groups, and participant flow. Yet, only 28% of trials fully reported on minimal important difference, 24% on outcome data missingness, 66% on blinding of the outcome assessor, and 42% on handling of outcome multiplicity.

    CONCLUSIONS: Primary outcome reporting in neonatal trials often lacks key information needed for interpretability of results, knowledge synthesis, and evidence-informed decision-making in neonatology. Use of existing outcome-reporting guidelines by trialists, journals, and peer reviewers will enhance transparent reporting of neonatal trials.

  4. Webbe J, Baba A, Butcher NJ, Rodrigues C, Stallwood E, Goren K, et al.
    Pediatrics, 2023 Sep 01;152(3).
    PMID: 37641894 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2022-060765
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is variability in the selection and reporting of outcomes in neonatal trials with key information frequently omitted. This can impact applicability of trial findings to clinicians, families, and caregivers, and impair evidence synthesis. The Neonatal Core Outcomes Set describes outcomes agreed as clinically important that should be assessed in all neonatal trials, and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-Outcomes 2022 is a new, harmonized, evidence-based reporting guideline for trial outcomes. We reviewed published trials using CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidance to identify exemplars of neonatal core outcome reporting to strengthen description of outcomes in future trial publications.

    METHODS: Neonatal trials including >100 participants per arm published between 2015 to 2020 with a primary outcome included in the Neonatal Core Outcome Set were identified. Primary outcome reporting was reviewed using CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidelines by assessors recruited from Cochrane Neonatal. Examples of clear and complete outcome reporting were identified with verbatim text extracted from trial reports.

    RESULTS: Thirty-six trials were reviewed by 39 assessors. Examples of good reporting for CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 criteria were identified and subdivided into 3 outcome categories: "survival," "short-term neonatal complications," and "long-term developmental outcomes" depending on the core outcomes to which they relate. These examples are presented to strengthen future research reporting.

    CONCLUSIONS: We have identified examples of good trial outcome reporting. These illustrate how important neonatal outcomes should be reported to meet the CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidelines. Emulating these examples will improve the transmission of information relating to outcomes and reduce associated research waste.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links