z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Systematic Reviews in Neonatal Respiratory Care: Are Some Conclusions Misleading?
Author(s) -
Andrés D. Maturana,
Fernando Moya,
Steven M. Donn
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
frontiers in pediatrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.96
H-Index - 36
ISSN - 2296-2360
DOI - 10.3389/fped.2020.00007
Subject(s) - medicine , intensive care medicine , psychological intervention , systematic review , perspective (graphical) , clinical practice , field (mathematics) , medline , pediatrics , family medicine , nursing , computer science , mathematics , artificial intelligence , political science , pure mathematics , law
An increasing amount of information is currently available in neonatal respiratory care. Systematic reviews are an important tool for clinical decision-making. The challenge is to combine studies that address a specific clinical question and have similar characteristics in terms of populations, interventions, comparators, and outcomes, so that their combined results provide a more precise estimate of the effect that can be validly extrapolated into clinical practice. The concept of heterogeneity is reviewed, emphasizing that it should be considered in a wider perspective and not just as a mere statistical test. A case is made of how well-designed studies of the neonatal respiratory literature, when equivocally combined, can provide very precise but potentially biased results. Systematic reviews in this field and others should be rigorously peer-reviewed before publication to avoid misleading readers to potentially biased conclusions.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom