Suppr超能文献

随机对照试验与公共卫生实践的变革

Randomised controlled trials and changing public health practice.

作者信息

Cockcroft Anne

机构信息

CIET Trust, Gaborone, Botswana.

Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Public Health. 2017 May 30;17(Suppl 1):409. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4287-7.

Abstract

One reason for doing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is that experiments can be convincing. Early epidemiological experimenters, such as Jenner and the smallpox vaccine and Snow and his famous Broad Street pump handle, already knew the answer they were demonstrating; they used the experiments as knowledge translation devices to convince others.More sophisticated modern experiments include cluster randomised controlled trials (CRCTs) for experiments in the public health setting. The knowledge translation value remains: RCTs and CRCTs can potentially stimulate changes of practice among stakeholders. Capitalising on the knowledge translation value of RCTs requires more than the standard reporting of trials. Those who are convinced by a trial and want to act, need to know how the trial relates to their own context, what contributed to success, and what might make it even more effective. Implementation research unpacks the back-story, examining how and why an intervention worked.The Camino Verde trial of community mobilisation for control of dengue reported a significant impact on entomological indices of the Aedes aegypti vector, and on serological dengue virus infection and self-reported dengue cases. This important study should lead to studies of similar interventions in other contexts, and ultimately to changes in dengue control practices. This supplement is the back-story of the trial, providing information to help researchers and planners to make use of the trial findings.Background articles include the full protocol, a systematic review of CRCTs of approaches for Aedes aegypti control, epidemiological and entomological findings from the baseline survey, and how baseline findings were used to set up the intervention. Secondary analyses of the entomological findings examine associations with the use of the larvicide temephos, and the impact of the intervention in different conditions of water supply and seasons.Other articles describe implementation and other impacts: the underlying approach; implementation in the trial's different social contexts; the different impact in women and men; the effects of using fish for vector control; the impact on household costs of personal protection and of cases of dengue illness; and ethical issues.We hope this supplement will increase the knowledge translation value of the Camino Verde trial.

摘要

开展随机对照试验(RCT)的一个原因是实验具有说服力。早期的流行病学实验者,如詹纳与天花疫苗、斯诺与他著名的宽街水泵把手实验,他们已然知晓自己要证明的答案;他们将实验用作知识传播工具来说服他人。更为复杂的现代实验包括用于公共卫生环境实验的整群随机对照试验(CRCT)。知识传播价值依然存在:随机对照试验和整群随机对照试验有可能促使利益相关者改变行为。要利用随机对照试验的知识传播价值,仅靠标准的试验报告是不够的。那些被试验说服并希望采取行动的人,需要了解该试验与他们自身情况的关联、促成成功的因素以及如何能使其更有效。实施研究剖析背后的故事,探究干预措施如何发挥作用以及为何能发挥作用。“绿径”登革热社区动员试验报告称,该试验对埃及伊蚊媒介的昆虫学指标、血清学登革热病毒感染以及自我报告的登革热病例产生了显著影响。这项重要研究应能促使在其他环境中开展类似干预措施的研究,并最终推动登革热防控实践的改变。本增刊讲述了该试验背后的故事,提供信息以帮助研究人员和规划者利用试验结果。背景文章包括完整方案、对埃及伊蚊控制方法的整群随机对照试验的系统评价、基线调查的流行病学和昆虫学结果,以及如何利用基线结果来制定干预措施。对昆虫学结果的二次分析考察了与使用杀幼虫剂双硫磷的关联,以及干预措施在不同供水条件和季节中的影响。其他文章描述了实施情况及其他影响:基本方法;在试验不同社会环境中的实施情况;对男性和女性的不同影响;使用鱼类进行病媒控制的效果;对家庭个人防护成本和登革热病例的影响;以及伦理问题。我们希望本增刊能提升“绿径”试验的知识传播价值。

相似文献

1
Randomised controlled trials and changing public health practice.随机对照试验与公共卫生实践的变革
BMC Public Health. 2017 May 30;17(Suppl 1):409. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4287-7.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验