Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(6): e2215209, 2022 06 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35653153

RESUMO

Importance: Clinical trial data sharing holds promise for maximizing the value of clinical research. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) adopted a policy promoting data sharing in July 2018. Objective: To evaluate the association of the ICMJE data sharing policy with data availability and reproducibility of main conclusions among leading surgical journals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study, conducted in October 2021, examined randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in 10 leading surgical journals before and after the implementation of the ICMJE data sharing policy in July 2018. Exposure: Implementation of the ICMJE data sharing policy. Main Outcomes and Measures: To demonstrate a pre-post increase in data availability from 5% to 25% (α = .05; ß = 0.1), 65 RCTs published before and 65 RCTs published after the policy was issued were included, and their data were requested. The primary outcome was data availability (ie, the receipt of sufficient data to enable reanalysis of the primary outcome). When data sharing was available, the primary outcomes reported in the journal articles were reanalyzed to explore reproducibility. The reproducibility features of these studies were detailed. Results: Data were available for 2 of 65 RCTs (3.1%) published before the ICMJE policy and for 2 of 65 RCTs (3.1%) published after the policy was issued (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.07-14.19; P > .99). A data sharing statement was observed in 11 of 65 RCTs (16.9%) published after the policy vs none before the policy (risk ratio, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.81-2.68; P = .001). Data obtained for reanalysis (n = 4) were not from RCTs published with a data sharing statement. Of the 4 RCTs with available data, all of them had primary outcomes that were fully reproduced. However, discrepancies or inaccuracies that were not associated with study conclusions were identified in 3 RCTs. These concerned the number of patients included in 1 RCT, the management of missing values in another RCT, and discrepant timing for the principal outcome declared in the study registration and reported in the third RCT. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study suggests that data sharing practices are rare in surgical journals despite the ICMJE policy and that most RCTs published in these journals lack transparency. The results of these studies may not be reproducible by external researchers.


Assuntos
Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação , Políticas , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
2.
Liver Transpl ; 23(2): 174-183, 2017 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27706895

RESUMO

During orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), clamping of the portal vein induces splanchnic venous congestion and accumulation of noxious compounds. These adverse effects could increase ischemia/reperfusion injury and subsequently the risk of graft dysfunction, especially for grafts harvested from extended criteria donors (ECDs). Temporary portocaval shunt (TPCS) could prevent these complications. Between 2002 and 2013, all OLTs performed in our center were retrospectively analyzed and a propensity score matching analysis was used to compare the effect of TPCS in 686 patients (343 in each group). Patients in the TPCS group required fewer intraoperative transfusions (median number of packed red blood cells-5 versus 6; P = 0.02; median number of fresh frozen plasma-5 versus 6; P = 0.02); had improvement of postoperative biological parameters (prothrombin time, Factor V, international normalized ratio, alkaline phosphatase, and gamma-glutamyltransferase levels); and showed significant reduction of biliary complications (4.7% versus 10.2%; P = 0.006). Survival analysis revealed that TPCS improved 3-month graft survival (94.2% versus 88.6%; P = 0.01) as well as longterm survival of elderly (ie, age > 70 years) donor grafts (P = 0.02). In conclusion, the use of TPCS should be recommended especially when considering an ECD graft. Liver Transplantation 23 174-183 2017 AASLD.


Assuntos
Doença Hepática Terminal/cirurgia , Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Sobrevivência de Enxerto , Transplante de Fígado/efeitos adversos , Derivação Portocava Cirúrgica/métodos , Traumatismo por Reperfusão/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Transfusão de Sangue , Seleção do Doador/métodos , Doença Hepática Terminal/mortalidade , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Transplante de Fígado/métodos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Veia Porta/cirurgia , Pontuação de Propensão , Estudos Retrospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento , Veia Cava Inferior/cirurgia , Adulto Jovem , gama-Glutamiltransferase
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA