Publication Trends of Pediatric and Adult Randomized Controlled Trials in General Medical Journals, 2005-2018: A Citation Analysis

Troubling Trends in Health Misinformation Related to Gender-Affirming Care

Amidst the misinformation climate about trans people and their health care that dominates policy and social discourse, autonomy-based rationales for gender-affirming care for trans and nonbinary youth are being called into question. In this commentary, which responds to "What Is the Aim of Pediatric 'Gender-Affirming' Care?," by Moti Gorin, we contextualize the virulent ideas circulating in misinformation campaigns that have become weaponized for unprecedented legal interference into standard health care. We conclude that the current legal justifications for upending gender-affirming care gloss over how this health care field meets conventional evidentiary standards and aligns protocols with most other fields of medicine. Refusal to offer gender-affirming care is more harmful than centralizing trans and nonbinary people's health autonomy.

Online randomised trials with children: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Paediatric trials must contend with many challenges that adult trials face but often bring additional obstacles. Decentralised trials, where some or all trial methods occur away from a centralised location, are a promising strategy to help meet these challenges. This scoping review aims to (a) identify what methods and tools have been used to create and conduct entirely online-decentralised trials with children and (b) determine the gaps in the knowledge in this field. This review will describe the methods used in these trials to identify their facilitators and the gaps in the knowledge.

METHODS

The methods were informed by guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. We systematically searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Embase databases, trial registries, pre-print servers, and the internet. We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials conducted entirely online with participants under 18 published in English. A risk of bias assessment was completed for all included studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-one trials met our inclusion criteria. The average age of participants was 14.6 years. Social media was the most common method of online recruitment. Most trials employed an external host website to store and protect their data. Duration of trials ranged from single-session interventions up to ten weeks. Fourteen trials compensated participants. Eight trials involved children in their trial design process; none reported compensation for this. Most trials had a low risk of bias in "random sequence generation", "selective reporting", and "other". Most trials had a high risk of bias in "blinding participants and personnel", "blinding of outcome assessment", and "incomplete outcome data". "Allocation concealment" was unclear in most studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a lack of transparent reporting of the recruitment, randomisation, and retention methods used in many of the trials included in this review. Patient and public involvement (PPI) was not common, and the compensation of PPI partners was not reported in any study. Consent methods and protection against fraudulent entries to trials were creative and thoroughly discussed by some trials and not addressed by others. More work and thorough reporting of how these trials are conducted is needed to increase their reproducibility and quality.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was not necessary since all data sources used are publicly available.

Online randomised trials with children: A scoping review protocol

Introduction: This scoping review will determine how online, randomised trials with children are conducted. The objectives of the review are: (a) to determine what methods and tools have been used to create and conduct online trials with children and (b) to identify the gaps in the knowledge in this field. Over the last decade, randomised trials employing online methods have gained traction. Decentralised methods lend themselves to certain types of trials and can offer advantages over traditional trial methods, potentially increasing participant reach and diversity and decreasing research waste.  However, decentralised trials that have all aspects of the trial exclusively online are not yet common, and those involving children even less so. This scoping review will describe and evaluate the methods used in these trials to understand how they may be effectively employed. Methods: Methods are informed by guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews. The search strategy was developed in consultation with an information specialist for the following databases: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Embase. Grey literature searches will be completed with the consultation of experts in decentralised trials and digital health using internet searches and suitable trial registries. Once identified, included full-text studies’ references will be manually searched for any trials that may have been missed. We will include randomised and quasi-randomised trials conducted exclusively online with participants under the age of 18 published in English. We will not limit by country of conduct or date of publication. Data will be collected using a data charting tool and presented in text, graphical, and tabular formats. Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not needed since all data sources used are publicly available. The review will be available as a preprint before publication in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal.

Patient, Caregiver, and Clinician Participation in Prioritization of Research Questions in Pediatric Hospital Medicine

IMPORTANCE

The research agenda in pediatric hospital medicine has seldom considered the perspectives of young people, parents and caregivers, and health care professionals. Their perspectives may be useful in identifying questions on topics for research.

OBJECTIVE

To prioritize unanswered research questions in pediatric hospital medicine from the perspectives of young people, parents/caregivers, and health care professionals.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between August 4, 2020, and August 19, 2021, two online surveys and a virtual workshop were conducted, using modified Delphi technique and nominal group technique. Young people, parents/caregivers, and health care professionals with experiences in pediatric hospital medicine in Canada were included.

INTERVENTIONS

The established James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership method was used. In phase 1, a survey collected unanswered questions regarding pediatric hospital medicine via 3 open-ended questions. Survey responses were used to develop summary questions that went through an evidence-checking process. Unanswered questions were brought to a phase 2 interim prioritization survey. The top 10 unanswered research questions in pediatric hospital medicine were established at the final priority setting workshop.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Survey responses, top 10 research questions.

RESULTS

The phase 1 survey was completed by 188 participants (148 of 167 [89%] females; 17 of 167 [10%] males; mean [SD] age, 39.5 [12.4] years) and generated 495 unanswered research questions and comments, of which 58 were deemed out of scope. The remaining 437 responses were grouped into themes (eg, communication, shared decision-making, health service delivery, and health service management) and then refined to 75 unanswered research questions. Of these 75, only 4 questions had sufficient evidence. To make the number of questions in phase 2 manageable, 21 questions submitted by only 1 respondent were eliminated. Fifty unanswered research questions were included in the phase 2 survey, which was completed by 201 participants (165 of 186 [89%] females; 19 of 186 [10%] males; mean [SD] age, 40.0 [11.0] years). A short list of 16 questions-the top 10 questions from patient partners (youths, parents/caregivers) and clinicians-was presented at the final priority setting workshop and the top 10 questions were prioritized. The top 10 questions focused on the care of special inpatient populations (eg, children with medical complexity), communication, shared decision-making, support strategies in the hospital, mental health supports, shortening length of stay, and supporting Indigenous patients, parents/caregivers, and families.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This patient-oriented pediatric hospital medicine priority setting partnership identified the most important unanswered research questions focused on the care of children in the hospital. These questions provide a possible roadmap for research on areas deemed important to young people, parents/caregivers, and clinicians.

Correlation Between National Institutes of Health Funding for Pediatric Research and Pediatric Disease Burden in the US

IMPORTANCE

The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest government funding source for biomedical research globally. Burden of disease is one of the factors considered by the NIH in making funding allocations, though it is not known how funding patterns are associated with disease burden for pediatric conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the correlation between NIH funding and disease burden across pediatric conditions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study evaluates NIH grants funding pediatric research from 2015 to 2018 in the US. Pediatric grants were classified according to disease categories studied. Disease burden for each category was determined using measures from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation and hospitalization data from the 2016 Kids' Inpatient Database.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE

Correlation between NIH funding and pediatric disease burden using Spearman rank order coefficients and predicted amounts of disease-specific funding based on disease burden estimated from linear regression models.

RESULTS

This study analyzed 14 060 disease-specific pediatric grants awarded by the NIH from 2015 to 2018 in the US. Annual funding for disease categories ranged from $0 to $382 849 631. Funding for pediatric research was correlated with pediatric disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), deaths, years lived with disability, and years of life lost (r, 0.56-0.63; P < 0.001 for all measures). There was also a correlation between funding and hospital-based metrics, including hospital days, number of hospital admissions, and hospital charges (r, 0.67-0.69; P < .001 for all measures). Eight disease categories received greater than $500 million more than predicted levels relative to DALYs, while 5 disease categories were funded more than $50 million less than predicted levels. Based on predicted levels of funding, congenital birth defects; endocrine, metabolic, blood, and immune disorders; and HIV/AIDS were the most overfunded categories relative to DALYs and hospital days. Conditions identified as most underfunded differed depending on use of DALYs or hospital days in estimating predicted funding levels.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

NIH funding for pediatric research was correlated with pediatric disease burden in the US with variable correlation based on the disease metric applied. There was substantial overfunding and underfunding of certain conditions. Ongoing evaluation of pediatric funding patterns using a complementary set of disease measures may help inform and prioritize pediatric research funding.

Identifying Conditions With High Prevalence, Cost, and Variation in Cost in US Children's Hospitals

IMPORTANCE

Identifying high priority pediatric conditions is important for setting a research agenda in hospital pediatrics that will benefit families, clinicians, and the health care system. However, the last such prioritization study was conducted more than a decade ago and used International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes.

OBJECTIVES

To identify conditions that should be prioritized for comparative effectiveness research based on prevalence, cost, and variation in cost of hospitalizations using contemporary data at US children's hospitals.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study of children with hospital encounters used data from the Pediatric Health Information System database. Children younger than 18 years with inpatient hospital encounters at 45 tertiary care US children's hospitals between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, were included. Data were analyzed from March 2020 to April 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The condition-specific prevalence and total standardized cost, the corresponding prevalence and cost ranks, and the variation in standardized cost per encounter across hospitals were analyzed. The variation in cost was assessed using the number of outlier hospitals and intraclass correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

There were 2 882 490 inpatient hospital encounters (median [interquartile range] age, 4 [1-12] years; 1 554 024 [53.9%] boys) included. Among the 50 most prevalent and 50 most costly conditions (total, 74 conditions), 49 (66.2%) were medical, 15 (20.3%) were surgical, and 10 (13.5%) were medical/surgical. The top 10 conditions by cost accounted for $12.4 billion of $33.4 billion total costs (37.4%) and 592 815 encounters (33.8% of all encounters). Of 74 conditions, 4 conditions had an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.30 or higher (ie, major depressive disorder: ICC, 0.49; type 1 diabetes with complications: ICC, 0.36; diabetic ketoacidosis: ICC, 0.33; acute appendicitis without peritonitis: ICC, 0.30), and 9 conditions had an ICC higher than 0.20 (scoliosis: ICC, 0.27; hypertrophy of tonsils and adenoids: ICC, 0.26; supracondylar fracture of humerus: ICC, 0.25; cleft lip and palate: ICC, 0.24; acute appendicitis with peritonitis: ICC, 0.21). Examples of conditions high in prevalence, cost, and variation in cost included major depressive disorder (cost rank, 19; prevalence rank, 10; ICC, 0.49), scoliosis (cost rank, 6; prevalence rank, 38; ICC, 0.27), acute appendicitis with peritonitis (cost rank, 13; prevalence rank, 11; ICC, 0.21), asthma (cost rank, 10; prevalence rank, 2; ICC, 0.17), and dehydration (cost rank, 24; prevalence rank, 8; ICC, 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that major depressive disorder, scoliosis, acute appendicitis with peritonitis, asthma, and dehydration were high in prevalence, costs, and variation in cost. These results could help identify where future comparative effectiveness research in hospital pediatrics should be targeted to improve the care and outcomes of hospitalized children.

[Opinions on clinical research and scientific paper publication]

No abstract available.