ReviewEuropean journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie2025
Collaborative Efforts in Pediatric Surgery: Lessons from European Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie, 2025. 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.
- Fostering continuous quality improvement in a European rare disease network: Where are we now?Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conducting multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric surgery for rare congenital anomalies presents unique challenges, including low patient recruitment, complex regulatory landscapes, and variability in care standards. This paper reflects on the experiences and lessons learned from the MUC-FIRE and STEPS-EA trials, supported by the European Reference Network for Rare Inherited and Congenital Anomalies (ERNICA), to provide guidance for future studies.A retrospective review was conducted on the design and execution of these trials, focusing on team composition, endpoint selection, patient recruitment strategies, regulatory compliance, and adaptive methodologies. Insights were derived from study protocols, monitoring reports, and the authors' experiences.Key factors contributing to trial success included multidisciplinary collaboration, leveraging existing research networks, and defining clear, measurable endpoints. Challenges such as recruitment delays, regulatory hurdles, and variations in care were mitigated through flexible protocols, proactive amendments, and stakeholder engagement. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified these difficulties, necessitating innovative strategies and extended timelines.The MUC-FIRE and STEPS-EA trials underscore the critical importance of international collaboration, adaptive strategies, and patient-centered approaches in overcoming the complexities of multicenter RCTs. Lessons from these experiences can inform the design and implementation of future trials, ultimately enhancing evidence generation and improving outcomes for children with rare congenital anomalies.
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.