65 research outputs found

    The information sources and journals consulted or read by UK paediatricians to inform their clinical practice and those which they consider important: a questionnaire survey

    Get PDF
    Background: Implementation of health research findings is important for medicine to be evidence-based. Previous studies have found variation in the information sources thought to be of greatest importance to clinicians but publication in peer-reviewed journals is the traditional route for dissemination of research findings. There is debate about whether the impact made on clinicians should be considered as part of the evaluation of research outputs. We aimed to determine first which information sources are generally most consulted by paediatricians to inform their clinical practice, and which sources they considered most important, and second, how many and which peer-reviewed journals they read. Methods: We enquired, by questionnaire survey, about the information sources and academic journals that UK medical paediatric specialists generally consulted, attended or read and considered important to their clinical practice. Results: The same three information sources – professional meetings & conferences, peerreviewed journals and medical colleagues – were, overall, the most consulted or attended and ranked the most important. No one information source was found to be of greatest importance to all groups of paediatricians. Journals were widely read by all groups, but the proportion ranking them first in importance as an information source ranged from 10% to 46%. The number of journals read varied between the groups, but Archives of Disease in Childhood and BMJ were the most read journals in all groups. Six out of the seven journals previously identified as containing best paediatric evidence are the most widely read overall by UK paediatricians, however, only the two most prominent are widely read by those based in the community. Conclusion: No one information source is dominant, therefore a variety of approaches to Continuing Professional Development and the dissemination of research findings to paediatricians should be used. Journals are an important information source. A small number of key ones can be identified and such analysis could provide valuable additional input into the evaluation of clinical research outputs

    What do evidence-based secondary journals tell us about the publication of clinically important articles in primary healthcare journals?

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: We conducted this analysis to determine i) which journals publish high-quality, clinically relevant studies in internal medicine, general/family practice, general practice nursing, and mental health; and ii) the proportion of clinically relevant articles in each journal. METHODS: We performed an analytic survey of a hand search of 170 general medicine, general healthcare, and specialty journals for 2000. Research staff assessed individual articles by using explicit criteria for scientific merit for healthcare application. Practitioners assessed the clinical importance of these articles. Outcome measures were the number of high-quality, clinically relevant studies published in the 170 journal titles and how many of these were published in each of four discipline-specific, secondary "evidence-based" journals (ACP Journal Club for internal medicine and its subspecialties; Evidence-Based Medicine for general/family practice; Evidence-Based Nursing for general practice nursing; and Evidence-Based Mental Health for all aspects of mental health). Original studies and review articles were classified for purpose: therapy and prevention, screening and diagnosis, prognosis, etiology and harm, economics and cost, clinical prediction guides, and qualitative studies. RESULTS: We evaluated 60,352 articles from 170 journal titles. The pass criteria of high-quality methods and clinically relevant material were met by 3059 original articles and 1073 review articles. For ACP Journal Club (internal medicine), four titles supplied 56.5% of the articles and 27 titles supplied the other 43.5%. For Evidence-Based Medicine (general/family practice), five titles supplied 50.7% of the articles and 40 titles supplied the remaining 49.3%. For Evidence-Based Nursing (general practice nursing), seven titles supplied 51.0% of the articles and 34 additional titles supplied 49.0%. For Evidence-Based Mental Health (mental health), nine titles supplied 53.2% of the articles and 34 additional titles supplied 46.8%. For the disciplines of internal medicine, general/family practice, and mental health (but not general practice nursing), the number of clinically important articles was correlated withScience Citation Index (SCI) Impact Factors. CONCLUSIONS: Although many clinical journals publish high-quality, clinically relevant and important original studies and systematic reviews, the articles for each discipline studied were concentrated in a small subset of journals. This subset varied according to healthcare discipline; however, many of the important articles for all disciplines in this study were published in broad-based healthcare journals rather than subspecialty or discipline-specific journals

    Haemoglobin thresholds to define anaemia from age 6 months to 65 years: estimates from international data sources.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Detection of anaemia is crucial for clinical medicine and public health. Current WHO anaemia definitions are based on statistical thresholds (fifth centiles) set more than 50 years ago. We sought to establish evidence for the statistical haemoglobin thresholds for anaemia that can be applied globally and inform WHO and clinical guidelines. METHODS: In this analysis we identified international data sources from populations in the USA, England, Australia, China, the Netherlands, Canada, Ecuador, and Bangladesh with sufficient clinical and laboratory information collected between 1998 and 2020 to obtain a healthy reference sample. Individuals with clinical or biochemical evidence of a condition that could reduce haemoglobin concentrations were excluded. We estimated haemoglobin thresholds (ie, 5th centiles) for children aged 6-23 months, 24-59 months, 5-11 years, and 12-17 years, and adults aged 18-65 years (including during pregnancy) for individual datasets and pooled across data sources. We also collated findings from three large-scale genetic studies to summarise genetic variants affecting haemoglobin concentrations in different ancestral populations. FINDINGS: We identified eight data sources comprising 18 individual datasets that were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. In pooled analyses, the haemoglobin fifth centile was 104·4 g/L (90% CI 103·5-105·3) in 924 children aged 6-23 months, 110·2 g/L (109·5-110·9) in 1874 children aged 24-59 months, and 114·4 g/L (113·6-115·2) in 1839 children aged 5-11 years. Values diverged by sex in adolescents and adults. In pooled analyses, the fifth centile was 122·2 g/L (90% CI 121·3-123·1) in 1741 female adolescents aged 12-17 years and 128·2 g/L (126·4-130·0) in 1103 male adolescents aged 12-17 years. In pooled analyses of adults aged 18-65 years, the fifth centile was 119·7 g/L (90% CI 119·1-120·3) in 3640 non-pregnant females and 134·9 g/L (134·2-135·6) in 2377 males. Fifth centiles in pregnancy were 110·3 g/L (90% CI 109·5-111·0) in the first trimester (n=772) and 105·9 g/L (104·0-107·7) in the second trimester (n=111), with insufficient data for analysis in the third trimester. There were insufficient data for adults older than 65 years. We did not identify ancestry-specific high prevalence of non-clinically relevant genetic variants that influence haemoglobin concentrations. INTERPRETATION: Our results enable global harmonisation of clinical and public health haemoglobin thresholds for diagnosis of anaemia. Haemoglobin thresholds are similar between sexes until adolescence, after which males have higher thresholds than females. We did not find any evidence that thresholds should differ between people of differering ancestries. FUNDING: World Health Organization and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

    Magnesium nebulization utilization in management of pediatric asthma (MagNUM PA) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: Up to 30 % of children with acute asthma are refractory to initial therapy, and 84 % of this subpopulation needs hospitalization. Finding safe, noninvasive, and effective strategies to treat this high-risk group would substantially decrease hospitalizations, healthcare costs, and the psycho-social burden of the disease. Whereas intravenous magnesium (Mg) is effective in severe refractory asthma, its use is sporadic due to safety concerns, with the main treatment goal being to prevent intensive care unit admission. In contrast, nebulized Mg is noninvasive, allows higher pulmonary drug concentrations, and has a much higher safety potential due to the lower rate of systemic delivery. Previous studies of inhaled Mg show disparate results due to the use of unknown/inefficient delivery methods and other methodological flaws. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized double-blind controlled trial in seven Canadian pediatric Emergency Departments (two-center pilot 2011 to 2014, Canada-wide November 2014 to December 2017). The trial will include 816 otherwise healthy children who are 2 to 17 years old, having had at least one previous wheezing episode, have received systemic corticosteroids, and have a Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) ≥ 5 points after three salbutamol and ipratropium treatments for a current acute asthma exacerbation. Eligible consenting children will receive three experimental treatments of nebulized salbutamol with either 600 mg of Mg sulfate or placebo 20 min apart, using an Aeroneb Go nebulizer, which has been shown to maximize pulmonary delivery while maintaining safety. The primary outcome is hospitalization within 24 h of the start of the experimental therapy for persistent respiratory distress or supplemental oxygen. Secondary outcomes include all-cause hospitalization within 24 h, PRAM, vital signs, number of bronchodilator treatments by 240 min, and the association between the difference in the primary outcome between the groups, age, gender, baseline PRAM, atopy, and “viral induced wheeze” phenotype (Fig. 1). DISCUSSION: If effective, inhaled Mg may represent an effective strategy to minimize morbidity in pediatric refractory acute asthma. Unlike previous works, this trial targets nonresponders to optimized initial therapy who are the most likely to benefit from inhaled Mg. Future dissemination of results will include knowledge translation, incorporation into a Cochrane Review, presentation at scientific meetings, and a peer-reviewed publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCTO1429415, registered 2 September 2011. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-1151-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users
    corecore