Comparative effectiveness trials: Generic misassumptions underlying the SUPPORT controversy

Pediatrics

Volumn 134, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 651-654

  Tyson, Jon E ^a   Walsh, Michele ^b   D'Angio, Carl T ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^b CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioethics; Clinical trial; Comparative effectiveness research; Informed consent

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MORTALITY; OXYGEN SATURATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROLENTAL FIBROPLASIA; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DRUG EFFECTS; NEWBORN; OXYGEN CONSUMPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; POSITIVE END EXPIRATORY PRESSURE; PREMATURITY; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STANDARDS; THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCE;

LUNG SURFACTANT;

HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; INFANT, PREMATURE; INFORMED CONSENT; OXYGEN CONSUMPTION; POSITIVE-PRESSURE RESPIRATION; PULMONARY SURFACTANTS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84989880574     PISSN: 00314005     EISSN: 10984275     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2013-4176     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Institute of Medicine. Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research, June 30, 2009. Available at: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2009/ComparativeEffectiveness-ResearchPriorities.aspx.
2. Sullivan P, Goldmann D. The promise of comparative effectiveness research. JAMA. 2011;305(4):400-401.
3. Selby JV, Beal AC, Frank L. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) national priorities for research and initial research agenda. JAMA. 2012;307(15):1583-1584.
4. Carlo WA, Finer NN, Walsh MC, et al; SUPPORT Study Group of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Neonatal Research Network. Target ranges of oxygen saturation in extremely preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(21): 1959-1969.
5. Vaucher YE, Peralta-Carcelen M, Finer NN, et al; SUPPORT Study Group of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Neonatal Research Network. Neurodevelopmental outcomes in the early CPAP and pulse oximetry trial. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(26):2495-2504.
6. See https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/billofhealth/2014/02/02/update-on-litigation-in-looney-vmoore-support-Trial-class-Action/Accessed March 10, 2014.
7. Macklin R, Shepherd L, Dreger A, et al. The OHRP and SUPPORT-Another view. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(2):e3.
8. Wilfond BS, Magnus D, Antommaria AH, et al. The OHRP and SUPPORT. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:e36.
9. Hudson KL, Guttmacher AE, Collins FS. In support of SUPPORT-A view from the NIH. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(25):2349-2351.
10. Drazen JM, Solomon CG, Greene MF. Informed consent and SUPPORT. 2013;368:1929-1931.
11. Vist GE, Bryant D, Somerville L, Birminghem T, Oxman AD. Outcomes of patients who participate in randomized controlled trials compared to similar patients receiving similar interventions who do not participate. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; (3):MR000009.
12. Rich W, Finer NN, Gantz MG, et al; SUPPORT and Generic Database Subcommittees of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Enrollment of extremely low birth weight infants in a clinical research study may not be representative. Pediatrics. 2012;129(3): 480-484.
13. Saugstad OD, Ramji S, Soll RF, Vento M. Resuscitation of newborn infants with 21% or 100% oxygen: An updated systematic review and meta-Analysis. Neonatology. 2008; 94(3):176-182.
14. Carlo WA, Bell EF, Walsh MC; SUPPORT Study Group of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Neonatal Research Network. Oxygen-saturation targets in extremely preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(20):1949-1950.
15. Guyatt G, Renie D, Meader MO, Cook DJ. Users' Guides to the Medical Literature. A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2002:173.
16. Meeting August 28, 2013. Available at: Www.hhs.gov/ohrp/newsroom/rfc. Accessed January 7, 2014.
17. Cohen S. The nocebo effect of informed consent. Bioethics. 2014;28(3):147-154.
18. Fost N. Ethical dilemmas in medical innovation and research: distinguishing experimentation from practice. Am J Law Med. 1998;24(2-3):163-83.
19. Kass NE, Faden RR, Goodman SN, Pronovost P, Tunis S, Beauchamp TL. The research-Treatment distinction: A problematic approach for determining which activities should have ethical oversight. Hastings Cent Rep. 2013;43 (s1):S4-S15.
20. Faden RR, Beauchamp TL, Kass NE. Informed consent, comparative effectiveness, and learning health care. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(8):766-768.
21. See 45 CFR 46.116 & 46.117 and Informed Consent Requirements in Emergency Research. Available at http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/hsdc97-01.html [section for research not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration] Accessed August 11, 2014.