10 research outputs found

    Fear of hypoglycaemia in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes : a systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background Many children with type 1 diabetes have poor glycaemic control. Since the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) showed that tighter control reduces complication rates, there has been more emphasis on intensified insulin therapy. We know that patients and families are afraid of hypoglycaemia. We hypothesised that fear of hypoglycaemia might take precedence over concern about long-term complications, and that behaviour to avoid hypoglycaemia might be at the cost of poorer control, and aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of any interventions designed to prevent that. The objective of this review was to systematically review studies concerning the extent and consequences of fear of hypoglycaemia in parents of children under 12 years of age with type 1 diabetes, and interventions to reduce it. Methods Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, meeting abstracts of EASD, ADA and Diabetes UK, Current Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, UK CRN, scrutiny of bibliographies of retrieved papers and contact with experts in the field. Inclusions: Relevant studies of any design of parents of children under 12 years of age with Type 1 diabetes were included. The key outcomes were the extent and impact of fear, hypoglycaemia avoidance behaviour in parents due to parental fear of hypoglycaemia in their children, the effect on diabetes control, and the impact of interventions to reduce this fear and hypoglycaemia avoidance behaviour. Results Eight articles from six studies met the inclusion criteria. All were cross sectional studies and most were of good quality. Parental fear of hypoglycaemia, anxiety and depression were reported to be common. There was a paucity of evidence on behaviour to avoid hypoglycaemia, but there were some suggestions that higher than desirable blood glucose levels might be permitted in order to avoid hypoglycaemia. No studies reporting interventions to reduce parental fear of hypoglycaemia were found. Conclusions The evidence base was limited. Parents of children with Type 1 diabetes reported considerable parental fear of hypoglycaemia, affecting both parental health and quality of life. There is some suggestion that hypoglycaemia avoidance behaviours by parents might adversely affect glycaemic control. Trials of interventions to reduce parental anxiety and hypoglycaemia avoidance behaviour are needed. We suggest that there should be a trial of structured education for parents of young children with Type 1 diabetes

    Strengthening reporting of neonatal trials

    No full text
    Background and Objectives: There is variability in the selection and reporting of outcomes in neonatal trials with key information frequently omitted. This can impact applicability of trial findings to clinicians, families, and caregivers, and impair evidence synthesis. The Neonatal Core Outcomes Set describes outcomes agreed as clinically important that should be assessed in all neonatal trials, and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 is a new, harmonized, evidence-based reporting guideline for trial outcomes. We reviewed published trials using CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidance to identify exemplars of neonatal core outcome reporting to strengthen description of outcomes in future trial publications. Methods: Neonatal trials including >100 participants per arm published between 2015-2020 with a primary outcome included in the Neonatal Core Outcome Set were identified. Primary outcome reporting was reviewed using CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidelines by assessors recruited from Cochrane Neonatal. Examples of clear and complete outcome reporting were identified with verbatim text extracted from trial reports. Results: Thirty-six trials were reviewed by 39 assessors. Examples of good reporting for CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 criteria were identified and subdivided into three outcome categories: “survival”, “short-term neonatal complications”, and “long-term developmental outcomes” depending on the core outcomes to which they relate. These examples are presented to strengthen future research reporting. Conclusions: We have identified examples of good trial outcome reporting. These illustrate how important neonatal outcomes should be reported to meet the CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidelines. Emulating these examples will improve the transmission of information relating to outcomes and reduce associated research waste

    Heterogeneity and gaps in reporting primary outcomes from neonatal trials

    No full text
    Objective: Clear outcome reporting in clinical trials facilitates accurate interpretation and application of findings and improves evidence-informed decision-making. Standardized core outcomes for reporting neonatal trials have been developed, but little is known about how primary outcomes are reported in neonatal trials. Our aim was to identify strengths and weaknesses of primary outcome reporting in recent neonatal trials. Methods: Neonatal trials including ≄100 participants/arm published between 2015-2020 with at least one primary outcome from a neonatal core outcome set were eligible. Raters recruited from Cochrane Neonatal were trained to evaluate the trials’ primary outcome reporting completeness using relevant items from CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 pertaining to the reporting of the definition, selection, measurement, analysis, and interpretation of primary trial outcomes. All trial reports were assessed by 3 raters. Assessments and discrepancies between raters were analyzed. Results: Outcome reporting evaluations were completed for 36 included neonatal trials by 39 raters. Levels of outcome reporting completeness were highly variable. All trials fully reported the primary outcome measurement domain, statistical methods used to compare treatment groups, and participant flow. Yet, only 28% of trials fully reported on minimal important difference, 24% on outcome data missingness, 66% on blinding of the outcome assessor, and 42% on handling of outcome multiplicity. Conclusions: Primary outcome reporting in neonatal trials often lacks key information needed for interpretability of results, knowledge synthesis, and evidence-informed decision-making in neonatology. Use of existing outcome reporting guidelines by trialists, journals, and peer reviewers will enhance transparent reporting of neonatal trials
    corecore