Systematic Reviews in Neonatal Respiratory Care: Are Some Conclusions Misleading?

被引:0
|
作者
Maturana, Andres [1 ,2 ]
Moya, Fernando [3 ]
Donn, Steven M. [4 ]
机构
[1] Clin Alemana, Dept Pediat, Neonatol, Santiago, Chile
[2] Univ Desarrollo, Ctr Desarrollo Educ, Fac Med, Santiago, Chile
[3] Coastal Childrens Serv PLLC, Coastal Carolina Neonatol, Betty Cameron Childrens Hosp, Wilmington, NC USA
[4] CS Mott Childrens Hosp, Div Neonatal Perinatal Med, Michigan Med, Ann Arbor, MI USA
来源
FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS | 2020年 / 8卷
关键词
neonatal respiratory care; meta-analysis; systematic reviews; clinical decision-making; infant-newborn; POSITIVE AIRWAY PRESSURE; FLOW NASAL CANNULAE; PRETERM INFANTS; PRONGS; CPAP; MASK; METAANALYSIS; CATHETER; THERAPY; SUPPORT;
D O I
10.3389/fped.2020.00007
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
An increasing amount of information is currently available in neonatal respiratory care. Systematic reviews are an important tool for clinical decision-making. The challenge is to combine studies that address a specific clinical question and have similar characteristics in terms of populations, interventions, comparators, and outcomes, so that their combined results provide a more precise estimate of the effect that can be validly extrapolated into clinical practice. The concept of heterogeneity is reviewed, emphasizing that it should be considered in a wider perspective and not just as a mere statistical test. A case is made of how well-designed studies of the neonatal respiratory literature, when equivocally combined, can provide very precise but potentially biased results. Systematic reviews in this field and others should be rigorously peer-reviewed before publication to avoid misleading readers to potentially biased conclusions.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Impact of reimbursement systems on patient care – a systematic review of systematic reviews
    Eva Wagenschieber
    Dominik Blunck
    Health Economics Review, 14
  • [42] Posters and Presentations at the RESPIRATORY CARE OPEN FORUM: Valid and Objective, or Biased and Misleading?
    Pierson, David J.
    RESPIRATORY CARE, 2008, 53 (11) : 1436 - 1440
  • [43] Effects of pay for performance in health care: A systematic review of systematic reviews
    Eijkenaar, Frank
    Emmert, Martin
    Scheppach, Manfred
    Schoeffski, Oliver
    HEALTH POLICY, 2013, 110 (2-3) : 115 - 130
  • [44] Some Potential "Pitfalls" in the Construction of Educational Systematic Reviews
    Coverdale, John
    Roberts, Laura Weiss
    Beresin, Eugene V.
    Louie, Alan K.
    Brenner, Adam M.
    Balon, Richard
    ACADEMIC PSYCHIATRY, 2017, 41 (02) : 246 - 250
  • [45] Efficacy of Therapist Supported Interventions from the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit to Home A Meta-Review of Systematic Reviews
    McCarty, Dana B.
    Letzkus, Lisa
    Attridge, Elaine
    Dusing, Stacey C.
    CLINICS IN PERINATOLOGY, 2023, 50 (01) : 157 - 178
  • [46] Reporting and methodologic quality of Cochrane Neonatal review group systematic reviews
    Al Faleh, Khalid
    Al-Omran, Mohammed
    BMC PEDIATRICS, 2009, 9
  • [47] Interventions to Improve Neonatal Health and Later Survival: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
    Lassi, Zohra S.
    Middleton, Philippa F.
    Crowther, Caroline
    Bhutta, Zulfiqar A.
    EBIOMEDICINE, 2015, 2 (08): : 985 - 1000
  • [48] Reporting and methodologic quality of Cochrane Neonatal review group systematic reviews
    Khalid Al Faleh
    Mohammed Al-Omran
    BMC Pediatrics, 9
  • [49] Conclusions in systematic reviews of mammography for breast cancer screening and associations with review design and author characteristics
    Raichand, Smriti
    Dunn, Adam G.
    Ong, Mei-Sing
    Bourgeois, Florence T.
    Coiera, Enrico
    Mandl, Kenneth D.
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, 6
  • [50] Drawing conclusions about causes from systematic reviews of risk factors: The Cambridge Quality Checklists
    Joseph Murray
    David P. Farrington
    Manuel P. Eisner
    Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2009, 5 : 1 - 23