Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29453599›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2018

Sequential analysis in neonatal research-systematic review.

Sebastiano A G Lava, Valéry Elie, Phuong Thi Viet Ha, Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sebastiano A G LavaPaediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacogenetics, Hôpital Robert Debré, Paris, France. sebastiano.lava@bluewin.ch.
Valéry EliePaediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacogenetics, Hôpital Robert Debré, Paris, France.
Phuong Thi Viet HaPaediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacogenetics, Hôpital Robert Debré, Paris, France.
Evelyne Jacqz-AigrainPaediatric Pharmacology and Pharmacogenetics, Hôpital Robert Debré, Paris, France.
Hôpital Robert-Debré · FRDélégation Paris 7 · FRUniversity Hospital of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As more new drugs are discovered, traditional designs come at their limits. Ten years after the adoption of the European Paediatric Regulation, we performed a systematic review on the US National Library of Medicine and Excerpta Medica database of sequential trials involving newborns. Out of 326 identified scientific reports, 21 trials were included. They enrolled 2832 patients, of whom 2099 were analyzed: the median number of neonates included per trial was 48 (IQR 22-87), median gestational age was 28.7 (IQR 27.9-30.9) weeks. Eighteen trials used sequential techniques to determine sample size, while 3 used continual reassessment methods for dose-finding. In 16 studies reporting sufficient data, the sequential design allowed to non-significantly reduce the number of enrolled neonates by a median of 24 (31%) patients (IQR - 4.75 to 136.5, p = 0.0674) with respect to a traditional trial. When the number of neonates finally included in the analysis was considered, the difference became significant: 35 (57%) patients (IQR 10 to 136.5, p = 0.0033).

conclusionSequential trial designs have not been frequently used in Neonatology. They might potentially be able to reduce the number of patients in drug trials, although this is not always the case. What is known: • In evaluating rare diseases in fragile populations, traditional designs come at their limits. About 20% of pediatric trials are discontinued, mainly because of recruitment problems. What is new: • Sequential trials involving newborns were infrequently used and only a few (n = 21) are available for analysis. • The sequential design allowed to non-significantly reduce the number of enrolled neonates by a median of 24 (31%) patients (IQR - 4.75 to 136.5, p = 0.0674).

Indexed as

Research DesignClinical Trials as TopicHumansInfant, NewbornNeonatologyClinical trialMethodologyNeonatologySequential analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29453599
OpenAlexW2801594126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.