Learning the right lessons from the SUPPORT study controversy.
作者信息
Lantos John D
出版信息
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014 Jan;99(1):F4-5. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304916. Epub 2013 Aug 22.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Learning the right lessons from the SUPPORT study controversy.从SUPPORT研究争议中吸取正确教训。
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014 Jan;99(1):F4-5. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304916. Epub 2013 Aug 22.
2
OHRP and SUPPORT: lessons in balancing safety and improving the way we care for patients.人类研究保护办公室（OHRP）与“支持”研究：平衡安全性与改进我们照顾患者方式的经验教训。
J Pediatr. 2013 Nov;163(5):1495-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.08.061. Epub 2013 Sep 17.
3
Ethical support for surfactant, positive pressure, and oxygenation randomized trial (SUPPORT).表面活性剂、正压通气和氧合随机试验（SUPPORT）的伦理支持
J Pediatr. 2013 Nov;163(5):1498-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.06.037. Epub 2013 Jul 23.
4
The trouble with informed consent.
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014 May;99(3):F251. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305621. Epub 2013 Dec 19.
5
Reducing lung injury during neonatal resuscitation of preterm infants.减少早产儿新生儿复苏期间的肺损伤。
J Pediatr. 2008 Dec;153(6):741-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.08.016.
6
CPAP and low oxygen saturation for very preterm babies?持续气道正压通气与极低出生体重儿的低氧饱和度？
N Engl J Med. 2010 May 27;362(21):2024-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1004342. Epub 2010 May 16.
7
Were There "Additional Foreseeable Risks" in the SUPPORT Study? Lessons Not Learned from the ARDSnet Clinical Trials.SUPPORT研究中存在“其他可预见风险”吗？ARDSnet临床试验未吸取的教训。
Hastings Cent Rep. 2015 Jan-Feb;45(1):21-9. doi: 10.1002/hast.403. Epub 2014 Dec 19.
8
Neurodevelopmental outcomes in the early CPAP and pulse oximetry trial.早期 CPAP 和脉搏血氧饱和度试验中的神经发育结果。
N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 27;367(26):2495-504. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1208506.
9
Nasal High-Flow Therapy as Primary Respiratory Support for Preterm Infants without the Need for Rescue with Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure.鼻塞式高流量湿化氧疗作为早产儿一线呼吸支持治疗，无需经鼻持续气道正压通气抢救。
Neonatology. 2019;115(2):175-181. doi: 10.1159/000492930. Epub 2018 Dec 4.
10
Vindication for SUPPORT.对SUPPORT研究的辩护。
N Engl J Med. 2015 Oct 8;373(15):1393-5. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1510876. Epub 2015 Sep 2.
引用本文的文献
1
Controls, comparator arms, and designs for critical care comparative effectiveness research: It's complicated.对照、对照臂和设计在重症护理中的比较效果研究：很复杂。
Clin Trials. 2024 Feb;21(1):124-135. doi: 10.1177/17407745231195094. Epub 2023 Aug 24.
2
Factors affecting trust in clinical trials conduct: Views of stakeholders from a qualitative study in Ghana.影响对临床试验实施信任的因素：来自加纳一项定性研究的利益相关者观点
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023 Mar 14;3(3):e0001178. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001178. eCollection 2023.
3
Patient, Caregiver, and Decliner Perspectives on Whether to Enroll in Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation Research.患者、护理人员及拒绝者对于是否参与适应性脑深部电刺激研究的观点。
Front Neurosci. 2021 Oct 7;15:734182. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.734182. eCollection 2021.
4
Ethical care requires pragmatic care research to guide medical practice under uncertainty.伦理关怀需要务实的关怀研究，以在不确定性情况下指导医疗实践。
Trials. 2021 Feb 15;22(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05084-0.
5
Measuring clinical uncertainty and equipoise by applying the agreement study methodology to patient management decisions.运用协议研究方法衡量临床不确定性和均衡，以评估患者管理决策。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Aug 25;20(1):214. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01095-8.
6
Trust me, I'm a researcher!: The role of trust in biomedical research.相信我，我是一名研究人员！：信任在生物医学研究中的作用。
Med Health Care Philos. 2017 Mar;20(1):43-50. doi: 10.1007/s11019-016-9721-6.
7
The ethics and regulatory landscape of including vulnerable populations in pragmatic clinical trials.在务实临床试验中纳入弱势群体的伦理与监管环境。
Clin Trials. 2015 Oct;12(5):503-10. doi: 10.1177/1740774515597701. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
8
Harms, benefits, and the nature of interventions in pragmatic clinical trials.实用临床试验中的危害、益处及干预措施的性质
Clin Trials. 2015 Oct;12(5):467-75. doi: 10.1177/1740774515597686. Epub 2015 Sep 15.
9
Oxygen saturation target range for extremely preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.极早产儿的氧饱和度目标范围：一项系统评价与荟萃分析
JAMA Pediatr. 2015 Apr;169(4):332-40. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.3307.
10
Communication about the risks and benefits of phase I pediatric oncology trials.关于儿科肿瘤I期试验风险与益处的沟通。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Mar;41:139-45. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.01.015. Epub 2015 Jan 29.
本文引用的文献
1
The OHRP and SUPPORT.人类研究保护办公室与支持项目
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jun 20;368(25):e36. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1307008. Epub 2013 Jun 5.
2
In support of SUPPORT--a view from the NIH.支持“支持性医护计划”——来自美国国立卫生研究院的观点
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jun 20;368(25):2349-51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1306986. Epub 2013 Jun 5.
3
Neonatal outcomes of extremely preterm infants from the NICHD Neonatal Research Network.美国国立卫生研究院新生儿研究网络中极早产儿的新生儿结局。
Pediatrics. 2010 Sep;126(3):443-56. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-2959. Epub 2010 Aug 23.
4
Ethical challenges in cancer research in children.儿童癌症研究中的伦理挑战。
Oncologist. 2007 Nov;12(11):1336-43. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.12-11-1336.
5
The "inclusion benefit" in clinical trials.临床试验中的“纳入受益”
J Pediatr. 1999 Feb;134(2):130-1. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(99)70400-2.
6
The clinical trial.
Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1981 Summer;59(3):324-39.
7
Clarifying the concepts of research ethics.阐明研究伦理的概念。
Hastings Cent Rep. 1979 Jun;9(3):21-6.
Zotero 插件