Over half of the WHO guidelines published from 2014 to 2019 explicitly considered health equity issues: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how and to what extent health equity considerations are assessed in World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We evaluated WHO guidelines published between January 2014 and May 2019. Health equity considerations were assessed in relation to differences in baseline risk, importance of outcomes for socially disadvantaged populations, inclusion of health inequity as an outcome, equity-related subgroup analysis, and indirectness in each recommendation. RESULTS: We identified 111 WHO guidelines, and 54% (60 of 111) of these used the Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework. For the 60 guidelines using an EtD framework, the likely impact on health equity was supported by research evidence in 28% of the recommendations (94 of 332). Research evidence was mostly provided as differences in baseline risk (23%, 78/332). Research evidence less frequently addressed the importance of outcomes for socially disadvantaged populations (11%, 36/332), considered indirectness of the evidence for socially disadvantaged populations (2%, 5/332), considered health inequities as an outcome (2%, 5/332) and considered differences in the magnitude of effect in relative terms between disadvantaged and more advantaged populations (1%, 3/332). CONCLUSION: The provision of research evidence to support equity judgements in WHO guidelines is still suboptimal, suggesting the need for better guidance and more training.

Identification and Evaluation of Controlled Trials in Pediatric Cardiology: Crowdsourced Scoping Review and Creation of Accessible Searchable Database.

Cardiac disease in children is associated with significant morbidity and mortality as well as increased health resource utilisation. There is a perception that there is a paucity of high-quality studies, particularly randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in the field of pediatric cardiology. We sought to identify, examine, and map the range of RCTs conducted in children with cardiac conditions, including the development of a searchable open-access database. A literature search was conducted encompassing MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 2018. All English-language RCTs enrolling children (age 0-21 years) with cardiac conditions were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate via crowdsourcing for each eligible study and entered into an online database. A total of 933 RCTs met eligibility criteria. Median trial recruitment was 49 patients (interquartile range 30-86) with 18.9% of studies (n = 176) including > 100 patients. A wide variety of populations and interventions were encompassed with congenital heart disease (79.8% of RCTs) and medications (63.3% of RCTs) often studied. Just over one-half of the trials (53.4%) clearly identified a primary outcome, and fewer than half (46.6%) fully documented a robust randomization process. Trials were summarised in a searchable online database (https://pediatrics.knack.com/cardiology-rct-database#cardiology-rcts/). Contrary to a commonly held perception, there are nearly 1,000 published RCTs in pediatric cardiology. The open-access database created as part of this project provides a resource that facilitates an efficient comprehensive review of the literature for clinicians and researchers caring for children with cardiac issues.