Evidence-based medicine in neonatology: time to re-think

The role and limitations of Cochrane reviews at the bedside: a systematic synopsis of five pediatric subspecialties

BACKGROUND

Cochrane meta-analyses provide the physician at the bedside with the most relevant, up-to-date clinical information. However, implementation of evidence-based medicine (EBM) at the bedside may be difficult for a variety of reasons. The aim of this study was to assess relevant issues and obstacles related to implementing EBM in pediatrics in real life at the bedside/cotside.

METHODS

We performed five systematic literature reviews of all published Cochrane reviews in neonatology (1996-2010), pediatric neurology (1996-2010), pediatric gastroenterology (1993-2012), pediatric cardiology (2001-2015), and complementary and alternative medicine (1996-2012; CAM) in children and neonates. In all five analyses, the main outcome variables were percentage of reviews concluding that a certain intervention provides a benefit, percentage of reviews concluding that a certain intervention should not be performed, and percentage of studies concluding that the current level of evidence is inconclusive.

RESULTS

In all five areas of pediatrics, a substantial number of Cochrane reviews yielded inconclusive data (neonatology: 46.6%; neuropediatrics: 26.8%; pediatric gastroenterology: 27.9%; pediatric cardiology: 42.9%; complementary and alternative medicine: 66.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our up-dated systematic synopsis reiterates the need for high-quality, sophisticated research to reduce the number of inconclusive meta-analyses in the field of pediatrics-most importantly in the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), neonatology, and pediatric cardiology. The realization of high-quality, clinically driven research will in turn yield more systematic reviews with a clear conclusion (e. g., in favor or against a certain intervention, or treatment modality), thus, substantively decreasing the proportion of inconclusive reviews.

Role of Cochrane reviews in pediatric neurology

Evidence-based medicine in pediatric neurology is considered an important contributor to the best quality of care. We performed a literature review of all Cochrane reviews from 1996-2010 in pediatric neurology. Some reviews concluded that a certain intervention provided benefits, some concluded that certain interventions should not be performed, and some concluded that the current level of evidence was inconclusive. One hundred and twelve reviews were enrolled; only 17 exclusively involved children. In 33/112, a clear recommendation in favor of a certain intervention was given, 11/112 issued a conditionally positive recommendation, and 32/112 concluded that certain interventions should not be performed. Six concluded that no differences were evident between different therapeutic/treatment options. Thirty were inconclusive. The proportion of inconclusive reviews increased during three a priori defined time intervals. Common criticisms regarding quality of enrolled studies included heterogeneous study populations (49/112), a small number of participants (48/112), and a lack of comparability of studies (40/112). An ongoing need exists for high-quality research to reduce the proportion of inconclusive meta-analyses. Further randomized, controlled trials should involve only pediatric populations.