4.3 Review

Optimizing cord management for each preterm baby- Challenges of collating individual participant data and recommendations for future collaborative research

期刊

SEMINARS IN PERINATOLOGY
卷 47, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.semperi.2023.151740

关键词

Neonatology; Preterm birth; Umbilical cord clamping; Evidence synthesis; Clinical Trials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The optimal cord management strategy at birth for each preterm baby is still unknown, despite more than 100 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) undertaken on this question. To address this, we brought together all RCTs examining cord management strategies at pre-term birth in the iCOMP (individual participant data on COrd Management at Preterm birth) Collaboration, to perform an individual participant data network meta-analysis.
The optimal cord management strategy at birth for each preterm baby is still unknown, despite more than 100 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) undertaken on this question. To address this, we brought together all RCTs examining cord management strategies at pre-term birth in the iCOMP (individual participant data on COrd Management at Preterm birth) Collaboration, to perform an individual participant data network meta-analysis. In this paper, we describe the trials and tribulations around obtaining individual participant data to resolve controversies around cord clamping, and we derive key recommendations for future collaborative research in perinatology. To reliably answer outstanding questions, future cord management research needs to be collaborative and coordinated, by aligning core protocol elements, ensuring quality and reporting standards are met, and carefully considering and reporting on vulnerable sub-populations. The iCOMP Collaboration is an example of the power of collaboration to address priority research questions, and ulti-mately improve neonatal outcomes worldwide.& COPY; 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据