Dataset Information

Treatment preference and recruitment to pediatric RCTs: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recruitment to pediatric randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can be a challenge, with ethical issues surrounding assent and consent. Pediatric RCTs frequently recruit from a smaller pool of patients making adequate recruitment difficult. One factor which influences recruitment and retention in pediatric trials is patient and parent preferences for treatment.

Purpose

To systematically review pediatric RCTs reporting treatment preference.

Methods

Database searches included: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and COCHRANE.Qualitative or quantitative papers were eligible if they reported: pediatric population, (0-17 years) recruited to an RCT and reported treatment preference for all or some of the participants/parents in any clinical area. Data extraction included: Number of eligible participants consenting to randomisation arms, number of eligible patients not randomised because of treatment preference, and any further information reported on preferences (e.g., if parent preference was different from child).

Results

Fifty-two studies were included. The number of eligible families declining participation in an RCT because of preference for treatment varied widely (between 2 and 70%) in feasibility, conventional and preference trial designs. Some families consented to trial involvement despite having preferences for a specific treatment. Data relating to 'participant flow and recruitment' was not always reported consistently, therefore numbers who were lost to follow-up or withdrew due to preference could not be extracted.

Conclusions

Families often have treatment preferences which may affect trial recruitment. Whilst children appear to hold treatment preferences, this is rarely reported. Further investigation is needed to understand the reasons for preference and the impact preference has on RCT recruitment, retention and outcome.

SUBMITTER: Beasant L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6430075 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Treatment preference and recruitment to pediatric RCTs: A systematic review.

Beasant L L Brigden A A Parslow R M RM Apperley H H Keep T T Northam A A Wray C C King H H Langdon R R Mills N N Young B B Crawley E E

Contemporary clinical trials communications 20190219

<h4>Background</h4>Recruitment to pediatric randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can be a challenge, with ethical issues surrounding assent and consent. Pediatric RCTs frequently recruit from a smaller pool of patients making adequate recruitment difficult. One factor which influences recruitment and retention in pediatric trials is patient and parent preferences for treatment.<h4>Purpose</h4>To systematically review pediatric RCTs reporting treatment preference.<h4>Methods</h4>Database searches ...[more]

PMID: 30949611

Similar Datasets

Project description:In the realm of acute respiratory infections, coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), poses a global public health challenge. The application of corticosteroids (CSs) in COVID-19 remains a contentious topic among researchers. Accordingly, our team performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to meticulously evaluate the safety and efficacy of CSs in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. To explore efficacy of CSs in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, we meticulously screened RCTs across key databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as China's CNKI and Wanfang Data. We focused on assessing the 28 days mortality rates. We evaluated the data heterogeneity using the Chi-square test and I2 values, setting significance at 0.1 and 50%. Data from 21 RCTs involving 5721 participants were analyzed. The analysis did not demonstrate a significant association between CSs intervention and the 28 days mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (relative risk [RR] = 0.93; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.84-1.03; P = 0.15). However, subgroup analysis revealed a significant reduction in 28 days mortality among patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 (RR at 0.85; 95% CI: 0.76-0.95; P = 0.004). Specifically, short-term CS administration (≤ 3 days) was associated with a substantial improvement in clinical outcomes (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.09-0.63; P = 0.004), as was longer-term use (≥ 8 days) (RR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.77-0.99; P = 0.04). Additionally, in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, the administration of dexamethasone increased the number of 28 days ventilator-free days (Mean Difference = 1.92; 95% CI: 0.44-3.40; P = 0.01). Methylprednisolone also demonstrated significant benefits in improving clinical outcomes (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.09-0.63; P = 0.004). Our meta-analysis demonstrated that although there is no significant difference in 28 days mortality rates among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the use of CSs may be beneficial in improving clinical outcomes in moderate or severe COVID-19 patients. There was no significant increase in the occurrence of adverse events associated with the use of CSs. Our meta-analysis provides evidence that while CSs may not be suitable for all COVID-19 patients, they could be effective and safe in severely ill COVID-19 patients. Consequently, it is recommended to administer CSs for personalized treatments in COVID-19 cases to improve the clinical outcomes while minimizing adverse events.

Project description:The effectiveness and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of obesity have not been assessed. This poses a challenge for clinicians who choose to use acupuncture in the treatment of obesity, as they are unable to prioritize this approach based on outcome variables. In May 2024, a literature search of five databases was conducted. Only randomized controlled trials evaluating body weight (BW), body mass index, waist circumference (WC), and adverse events in patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 25 or higher for various acupuncture modalities were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, version 2. Pairwise meta-analysis (PMA) and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed using a random effects model for quantitative synthesis. Fourteen studies (n = 868) were included. The included studies evaluated the following acupuncture modalities: electroacupuncture (EA) (N = 6), laser acupuncture (LA) (N = 2), auricular acupuncture (AA) (N = 5), and manual acupuncture (MA) (N = 3). The PMA found that adding EA to usual care (UC), compared to UC alone, reduced BW (MD = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.12 to 3.80, I2 = 58%, REM, N = 3, n = 157). The NMA of BW showed the following effect sizes for UC alone versus each acupuncture modality combined with UC: LA (MD = 2.09, 95% CI = 0.04 to 3.86), EA (MD = 2.04, 95% CI = 0.88 to 3.50), AA (MD = 1.69, 95% CI = -0.11 to 3.58), and MA (MD = 1.02, 95% CI = -0.82 to 2.94). The probability of each modality being the optimal treatment was evaluated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. EA was the most efficacious for BW and BMI, while LA was the most efficacious for WC. EA and LA can effectively complement clinical obesity management. The number of included studies was limited, and publication bias may have occurred, necessitating a cautious interpretation of the results. Furthermore, most studies lasted between six and 12 weeks. Future clinical studies of acupuncture for obesity should include longer follow-up periods. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=387788, identifier CRD42023387788.

Project description:BackgroundClinical significance in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) can be determined using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), which should inform the delta value used to determine sample size. The primary objective was to assess clinical significance in the pediatric oncology randomized controlled trial (RCT) treatment literature by evaluating: (1) the relationship between the treatment effect and the delta value as reported in the sample size calculation, and (2) the concordance between statistical and clinical significance. The secondary objective was to evaluate the reporting of methodological attributes related to clinical significance.MethodsRCTs of pediatric cancer treatments, where a sample size calculation with a delta value was reported or could be calculated, were systematically reviewed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Childhood Cancer Group Specialized Register through CENTRAL were searched from inception to July 2016.ResultsRCTs (77 overall; 11 and 66), representing 95 (13 and 82) randomized questions were included for non-inferiority and superiority RCTs (herein, respectively). The minority (22.1% overall; 76.9 and 13.4%) of randomized questions reported conclusions based on clinical significance, and only 4.2% (15.4 and 2.4%) explicitly based the delta value on the MCID. Over half (67.4% overall; 92.3 and 63.4%) reported a confidence interval or standard error for the primary outcome experimental and control values and 12.6% (46.2 and 7.3%) reported the treatment effect, respectively. Of the 47 randomized questions in superiority trials that reported statistically non-significant findings, 25.5% were possibly clinically significant. Of the 24 randomized questions in superiority trials that were statistically significant, only 8.3% were definitely clinically significant.ConclusionsA minority of RCTs in the pediatric oncology literature reported methodological attributes related to clinical significance and a notable portion of statistically insignificant studies were possibly clinically significance.

Dataset Information

Treatment preference and recruitment to pediatric RCTs: A systematic review.

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Treatment preference and recruitment to pediatric RCTs: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets