ArticleTranslational pediatrics2023
Comparing the impact of comprehensive care with conventional care in children with congenital heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study compares the impact of comprehensive care and conventional care on interventional therapy in children with congenital heart disease and to provide a reference basis for clinical care. Methods: Clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining care during interventional therapy in children with congenital heart disease were identified in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases using a combination of subject terms and free terms. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to November 27th, 2022. The control group was given conventional care and the experimental group was given comprehensive care on the basis of conventional care. The outcome indicators included one or more of postoperative complications (number of cases), puncture time (minutes), pain score (points), surgical operation time (minutes), X-ray exposure time (minutes) and length of hospital stay (days). Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 14.0 software. The publication bias test was conducted using Harbor's test. Results: A total of 24 RCTs were eventually included, and a total of 2,028 study subjects were enrolled, including 1,025 in the test group and 1,003 in the control group. Meta-analysis showed that comprehensive care resulted in a lower risk of complications [risk ratio (RR) =0.27; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21 to 0.34]. Furthermore, subjects who received comprehensive care had lower puncture time [standardized mean difference (SMD) =-2.50; 95% CI: -3.23 to -1.77], lower operating time [SMD (95% CI): -2.50 (-3.31, -1.68)], lower X-ray exposition time [SMD (95% CI): -1.29 (-2.51, -0.07)], shorter length of hospital stay [SMD (95% CI): -1.57 (-2.04, -1.09)], and lower pain scores [SMD (95% CI): -2.43 (-3.20, -1.65)]. Conclusions: Comprehensive care has higher clinical utility, which is worthy of clinical application and popularization.
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.