Challenges to Excellence in Child Health Research

Zylke, Jody W.; Rivara, Frederick P.; Bauchner, Howard

doi:10.1001/2012.jama.10982

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, despite our efforts to incorporate the best possible evidence, less than half of the final indicators selected by the expert panel are based on moderate or high quality evidence. Unfortunately, this is likely a reflection of gaps in the overall quantity and quality of child health research 50 and reinforces the need for further high quality research in pediatrics. Second, information on the volume of patients seen and the availability of data may not be generalizable to other pediatric institutions and is certainly not applicable to smaller, nonpediatric hospitals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality Indicators for High Acuity Pediatric Conditions

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE: Identifying gaps in care and improving outcomes for severely ill children requires the development of evidence-based performance measures. We used a systematic process involving multiple stakeholders to identify and develop evidence-based quality indicators for high acuity pediatric conditions relevant to any emergency department (ED) setting where children are seen. METHODS:A prioritized list of clinical conditions was selected by an advisory panel. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify existing indicators, as well as guidelines and evidence that could be used to inform the creation of new indicators. A multiphase, Rand-modified Delphi method consisting of anonymous questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting of an expert panel was used for indicator selection. Measure specifications and evidence grading were created for each indicator, and the feasibility and reliability of measurement was assessed in a tertiary care pediatric ED. RESULTS:The conditions selected for indicator development were diabetic ketoacidosis, status asthmaticus, anaphylaxis, status epilepticus, severe head injury, and sepsis. The majority of the 62 selected indicators reflect ED processes (84%) with few indicators reflecting structures (11%) or outcomes (5%). Thirty-seven percent (n = 23) of the selected indicators are based on moderate or high quality evidence. Data were available and interrater reliability acceptable for the majority of indicators. CONCLUSIONS:A systematic process involving multiple stakeholders was used to develop evidence-based quality indicators for high acuity pediatric conditions. Future work will test the reliability and feasibility of data collection on these indicators across the spectrum of ED settings that provide care for children . Pediatrics 2013;132:752-762

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality Indicators for High Acuity Pediatric Conditions

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10,12 Understanding participant preferences is particularly important in research involving children due to the necessary involvement of parents in providing informed consent, and often their active involvement through follow-up, medication administration, or travel. 13 However, none of the publications on participant preferences, 7,8,10,12 or any included in a systematic review of consumer involvement in developing health care policy and research, 9 included parents/guardians or pediatric research. As a result, data on parental preferences in the design and conduct of pediatric research are limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although all clinical research involves the need to balance limited funding with the time and human resource costs associated with enrolling children, 13 this is particularly true in the ED setting. Patients and families visit EDs 24 hours per day, and it is difficult to predict when eligible patients will present.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parental experiences and preferences as participants in pediatric research conducted in the emergency department

Stang

Freedman

Mikrogianakis

et al. 2017

CJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A growing body of literature supports patient and public involvement in the design, prioritization, and dissemination of research and evidence‐based medicine . This is particularly important in research involving children due to the necessary involvement of parents in providing informed consent and participating in the research . The Patient‐Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) defines patient engagement in research as “the meaningful involvement of patients, caregivers, clinicians, and other healthcare stakeholders throughout the research process—from topic selection through design and conduct of research to dissemination of results” (https://www.pcori.org/engagement/what-we-mean-engagement).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%