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.
J Pediatr ; 236: 301-306, 2021 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34023345

RESUMO

Untreated congenital toxoplasmosis remains an important cause of neurologic and ocular disease worldwide. However, congenitally infected infants may not have signs and symptoms their physicians recognize, leading to delayed diagnosis and missed opportunities for treatment. We describe a pair of twins diagnosed with congenital toxoplasmosis at 11 months of age following incidental detection of leukocoria in one twin.


Assuntos
Megalencefalia/etiologia , Distúrbios Pupilares/etiologia , Toxoplasmose Congênita/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Tardio , Feminino , Humanos , Achados Incidentais , Lactente , Masculino , Gêmeos Dizigóticos
2.
J Pediatr ; 193: 237-244.e37, 2018 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29169611

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: For child health randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in 2012, we aimed to describe design and reporting characteristics and evaluate changes since 2007; assess the association between trial design and registration and risk of bias (RoB); and assess the association between RoB and effect size. STUDY DESIGN: For 300 RCTs, we extracted design and reporting characteristics and assessed RoB. We assessed 5-year changes in design and reporting (based on 300 RCTs we had previously analyzed) using the Fisher exact test. We tested for associations between design and reporting characteristics and overall RoB and registration using the Fisher exact, Cochran-Armitage, Kruskal-Wallis, and Jonckheere-Terpstra tests. We pooled effect sizes and tested for differences by RoB using the χ2 test for subgroups in meta-analysis. RESULTS: The 2012 and 2007 RCTs differed with respect to many design and reporting characteristics. From 2007 to 2012, RoB did not change for random sequence generation and improved for allocation concealment (P < .001). Fewer 2012 RCTs were rated high overall RoB and more were rated unclear (P = .03). Only 7.3% of 2012 RCTs were rated low overall RoB. Trial registration doubled from 2007 to 2012 (23% to 46%) (P < .001) and was associated with lower RoB (P = .009). Effect size did not differ by RoB (P = .43) CONCLUSIONS: Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were not often reported, and selective reporting was prevalent. Measures to increase trialists' awareness and application of existing reporting guidance, and the prospective registration of RCTs is needed to improve the trustworthiness of findings from this field.


Assuntos
Saúde da Criança/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicações/estatística & dados numéricos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos , Projetos de Pesquisa/estatística & dados numéricos , Viés , Criança , Humanos
3.
J Pediatr ; 157(2): 322-330.e17, 2010 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20434730

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative effectiveness of medical interventions in adults versus children. STUDY DESIGN: We identified from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 1, 2007) meta-analyses with data on at least 1 adult and 1 pediatric randomized trial with binary primary efficacy outcome. For each meta-analysis, we calculated the summary odds ratio of the adult trials and the pediatric trials, respectively; the relative odds ratio (ROR) of the adult versus pediatric odds ratios per meta-analysis; and the summary ROR across all meta-analyses. ROR <1 means that the experimental intervention is more unfavorable in children than adults. RESULTS: Across 128 eligible meta-analyses (1051 adult and 343 pediatric trials), the summary ROR did not show a statistically significant difference between adults and children (0.96; 95% confidence intervals, 0.86 to 1.08). However, in all meta-analyses except for 1, the individual ROR's 95% confidence intervals could not exclude a relative difference in efficacy over 20%. In two-thirds, the relative difference in observed point estimates exceeded 50%. Nine statistically significant discrepancies were identified; 4 of them were also clinically important. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment effects are on average similar in adults and children, but available evidence leaves large uncertainty about their relative efficacy. Clinically important discrepancies may occur.


Assuntos
Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Criança , Pesquisa Comparativa da Efetividade , Humanos , Metanálise como Assunto , Razão de Chances , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Projetos de Pesquisa , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA