No abstract

ObjectivesConsidering equity into guidelines presents methodological challenges. This study aims to qualitatively synthesise the methods for incorporating equity in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).SettingContent analysis of methodological publications.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesMethodological publications were included if they provided checklists/frameworks on when, how and to what extent equity should be incorporated in CPGs.Data sourcesWe electronically searched MEDLINE, retrieved references, and browsed guideline development organisation websites from inception to January 2013. After study selection by two authors, general characteristics and checklists items/framework components from included studies were extracted. Based on the questions or items from checklists/frameworks (unit of analysis), content analysis was conducted to identify themes and questions/items were grouped into these themes.Primary outcomesThe primary outcomes were methodological themes and processes on how to address equity issues in guideline development.Results8 studies with 10 publications were included from 3405 citations. In total, a list of 87 questions/items was generated from 17 checklists/frameworks. After content analysis, questions were grouped into eight themes (‘scoping questions’, ‘searching relevant evidence’, ‘appraising evidence and recommendations’, ‘formulating recommendations’, ‘monitoring implementation’, ‘providing a flow chart to include equity in CPGs’, and ‘others: reporting of guidelines and comments from stakeholders’ for CPG developers and ‘assessing the quality of CPGs’ for CPG users). Four included studies covered more than five of these themes. We also summarised the process of guideline development based on the themes mentioned above.ConclusionsFor disadvantaged population-specific CPGs, eight important methodological issues identified in this review should be considered when including equity in CPGs under the guidance of a scientific guideline development manual.

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence, management, and outcomes of pediatric severe sepsis in the main PICUs in Southwest China. Design: A prospective, observational, and multicenter study. Setting: Eight PICUs in Southwest China with 19 (13–24) beds and 1,322 (1,066–1,452) annual admissions each. Patients: A total of 10,598 patients (29 d to 18 yr old) were consecutively admitted between September 1, 2016, and August 31, 2017. All patients were screened and evaluated for severe sepsis or septic shock. Of them, 10,353 patients were excluded due to incomplete data or not meeting the consensus criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock; 245 patients were included with complete data. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Finally, 245 patients who were diagnosed with severe sepsis or septic shock were included in the study, with an incidence rate of 2.3%. Of them, 64.0% of the enrolled patients were male with 80.8% being less than 5 years old and 60.8% being from rural areas. The respiratory system was the most common organ system in which dysfunction was observed (76.7%) as well as the most frequently infected site (37.6%). The primary therapies were antibiotics (99.0%), immunoglobulin (88.3%), mechanical ventilation (78.4%), vasoactive infusions (59.6%), and corticosteroids (46.1%). Among the 188 patients who had respiratory dysfunction, 173(92%) required mechanical ventilation and 39 (20.7%) met the criteria for pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Seven of the patients with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome died (7/39, 17.9%). The median durations for mechanical ventilation and vasoactive medications were 123.5 hours (35.25–226.00 hr) and 2 days (1–5 d), respectively. Eighty-six percent of patients had multiple organ dysfunction syndrome at the point at which severe sepsis was recognized, and 31% had underlying conditions. The hospital mortality rate was 18.8%. Conclusions: This report is the first to present the prevalence, treatment, and outcomes of pediatric severe sepsis in the main PICU centers in Southwest China. The mortality rate remains high; therefore, improved clinical management and implementation of large-scale clinical trials are necessary to improve early diagnoses and treatment.

TS genotyping on paraffin-embedded fixed tissues proved to be the most useful method for prediction of outcome of 5-FU treatment in patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma.

BackgroundRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not always well reported, especially in terms of their methodological descriptions. This study aimed to investigate the adherence of methodological reporting complying with CONSORT and explore associated trial level variables in the Chinese nursing care field.MethodsIn June 2012, we identified RCTs published in five leading Chinese nursing journals and included trials with details of randomized methods. The quality of methodological reporting was measured through the methods section of the CONSORT checklist and the overall CONSORT methodological items score was calculated and expressed as a percentage. Meanwhile, we hypothesized that some general and methodological characteristics were associated with reporting quality and conducted a regression with these data to explore the correlation. The descriptive and regression statistics were calculated via SPSS 13.0.ResultsIn total, 680 RCTs were included. The overall CONSORT methodological items score was 6.34±0.97 (Mean ± SD). No RCT reported descriptions and changes in “trial design,” changes in “outcomes” and “implementation,” or descriptions of the similarity of interventions for “blinding.” Poor reporting was found in detailing the “settings of participants” (13.1%), “type of randomization sequence generation” (1.8%), calculation methods of “sample size” (0.4%), explanation of any interim analyses and stopping guidelines for “sample size” (0.3%), “allocation concealment mechanism” (0.3%), additional analyses in “statistical methods” (2.1%), and targeted subjects and methods of “blinding” (5.9%). More than 50% of trials described randomization sequence generation, the eligibility criteria of “participants,” “interventions,” and definitions of the “outcomes” and “statistical methods.” The regression analysis found that publication year and ITT analysis were weakly associated with CONSORT score.ConclusionsThe completeness of methodological reporting of RCTs in the Chinese nursing care field is poor, especially with regard to the reporting of trial design, changes in outcomes, sample size calculation, allocation concealment, blinding, and statistical methods.