Cargando…

Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses

BACKGROUND: The delivery of optimal medical care to children is dependent on the availability of child relevant research. Our objectives were to: i) systematically review and describe how children are handled in reviews of drug interventions published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cramer, Kristie, Wiebe, Natasha, Moyer, Virginia, Hartling, Lisa, Williams, Katrina, Swingler, George, Klassen, Terry P
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1261269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16176579
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-5-38
_version_ 1782125871311618048
author Cramer, Kristie
Wiebe, Natasha
Moyer, Virginia
Hartling, Lisa
Williams, Katrina
Swingler, George
Klassen, Terry P
author_facet Cramer, Kristie
Wiebe, Natasha
Moyer, Virginia
Hartling, Lisa
Williams, Katrina
Swingler, George
Klassen, Terry P
author_sort Cramer, Kristie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The delivery of optimal medical care to children is dependent on the availability of child relevant research. Our objectives were to: i) systematically review and describe how children are handled in reviews of drug interventions published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR); and ii) determine when effect sizes for the same drug interventions differ between children and adults. METHODS: We systematically identified all of the reviews relevant to child health in the CDSR 2002, Issue 4. Reviews were included if they investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of a drug intervention for a condition that occurs in both children and adults. Information was extracted on review characteristics including study methods, results, and conclusions. RESULTS: From 1496 systematic reviews, 408 (27%) were identified as relevant to both adult and child health; 52% (213) of these included data from children. No significant differences were found in effect sizes between adults and children for any of the drug interventions or conditions investigated. However, all of the comparisons lacked the power to detect a clinically significant difference and wide confidence intervals suggest important differences cannot be excluded. A large amount of data was unavailable due to inadequate reporting at the trial and systematic review level. CONCLUSION: Overall, the findings of this study indicate there is a paucity of child-relevant and specific evidence generated from evidence syntheses of drug interventions. The results indicate a need for a higher standard of reporting for participant populations in studies of drug interventions.
format Text
id pubmed-1261269
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-12612692005-10-22 Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses Cramer, Kristie Wiebe, Natasha Moyer, Virginia Hartling, Lisa Williams, Katrina Swingler, George Klassen, Terry P BMC Pediatr Research Article BACKGROUND: The delivery of optimal medical care to children is dependent on the availability of child relevant research. Our objectives were to: i) systematically review and describe how children are handled in reviews of drug interventions published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR); and ii) determine when effect sizes for the same drug interventions differ between children and adults. METHODS: We systematically identified all of the reviews relevant to child health in the CDSR 2002, Issue 4. Reviews were included if they investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of a drug intervention for a condition that occurs in both children and adults. Information was extracted on review characteristics including study methods, results, and conclusions. RESULTS: From 1496 systematic reviews, 408 (27%) were identified as relevant to both adult and child health; 52% (213) of these included data from children. No significant differences were found in effect sizes between adults and children for any of the drug interventions or conditions investigated. However, all of the comparisons lacked the power to detect a clinically significant difference and wide confidence intervals suggest important differences cannot be excluded. A large amount of data was unavailable due to inadequate reporting at the trial and systematic review level. CONCLUSION: Overall, the findings of this study indicate there is a paucity of child-relevant and specific evidence generated from evidence syntheses of drug interventions. The results indicate a need for a higher standard of reporting for participant populations in studies of drug interventions. BioMed Central 2005-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC1261269/ /pubmed/16176579 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-5-38 Text en Copyright © 2005 Cramer et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cramer, Kristie
Wiebe, Natasha
Moyer, Virginia
Hartling, Lisa
Williams, Katrina
Swingler, George
Klassen, Terry P
Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
title Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
title_full Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
title_fullStr Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
title_full_unstemmed Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
title_short Children in reviews: Methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
title_sort children in reviews: methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1261269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16176579
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-5-38
work_keys_str_mv AT cramerkristie childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses
AT wiebenatasha childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses
AT moyervirginia childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses
AT hartlinglisa childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses
AT williamskatrina childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses
AT swinglergeorge childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses
AT klassenterryp childreninreviewsmethodologicalissuesinchildrelevantevidencesyntheses