ArticleAir medical journal
Ethical considerations for conducting a randomized controlled trial in transport.
Article in Air medical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of specific quality metrics to assess the performance of a specialised newborn transport programme.European journal of pediatrics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although recent studies support the rapid transfer of patients experiencing time-sensitive emergencies, limited data exist to support the use of air transport for nonurgent patient transfers. The nature of medical transport and the heterogeneity of patients who are transferred present unique challenges in designing and conducting clinical research trials that could contribute to the evidence-based decision making for patient care and transport. The current regulatory framework presents several barriers to conducting such research in the medical transport setting. We present a hypothetic study that randomizes patients to either ground or air transport as an exemplar. We discuss informed consent, risk, and the impracticality of conducting community consultations in a medical transport setting. Finally, recommendations for potential changes to current regulations are presented. These are directed at facilitating the conduct of emergency research through a system of oversight that integrates characteristics of quality improvement and health services research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.