Relative effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapeutic agents for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants: a protocol for a multicentre comparative effectiveness study (CANRxPDA)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is the most common cardiovascular problem that develops in preterm infants and evidence regarding the best treatment approach is lacking. Currently available medical options to treat a PDA include indomethacin, ibuprofen or acetaminophen. Wide variation exists in PDA treatment practices across Canada. In view of this large practice variation across Canadian neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), we plan to conduct a comparative effectiveness study of the different pharmacotherapeutic agents used to treat the PDA in preterm infants. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre prospective observational comparative-effectiveness research study of extremely preterm infants born <29 weeks gestational age with an echocardiography confirmed PDA will be conducted. All participating sites will self-select and adhere to one of the following primary pharmacotherapy protocols for all preterm babies who are deemed to require treatment.Standard dose ibuprofen (10 mg/kg followed by two doses of 5 mg/kg at 24 hours intervals) irrespective of postnatal age (oral/intravenous).Adjustable dose ibuprofen (oral/intravenous) (10 mg/kg followed by two doses of 5 mg/kg at 24 hours intervals if treated within the first 7 days after birth. Higher doses of ibuprofen up to 20 mg/kg followed by two doses of 10 mg/kg at 24 hours intervals if treated after the postnatal age cut-off for lower dose as per the local centre policy).Acetaminophen (oral/intravenous) (15 mg/kg every 6 hours) for 3-7 days.Intravenous indomethacin (0.1-0.3 mg/kg intravenous every 12-24 hours for a total of three doses). OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is failure of primary pharmacotherapy (defined as need for further medical and/or surgical/interventional treatment following an initial course of pharmacotherapy). The secondary outcomes include components of the primary outcome as well as clinical outcomes related to response to treatment or adverse effects of treatment. SITES AND SAMPLE SIZE: The study will be conducted in 22 NICUs across Canada with an anticipated enrollment of 1350 extremely preterm infants over 3 years. ANALYSIS: test, Student's t-test or Wilcoxon rank sum test as appropriate. To further examine differences in the primary and secondary outcomes between the four groups, multiple logistic or linear regression models will be applied for each outcome on the treatment groups, adjusted for potential confounders using generalised estimating equations to account for within-unit-clustering. As a sensitivity analysis, the difference in the primary and secondary outcomes between the treatment groups will also be examined using propensity score method with inverse probability weighting approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the IWK Research Ethics Board (#1025627) as well as the respective institutional review boards of the participating centres. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04347720.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».