PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 937 records · Page 52Linked to original sources
PubMed2005

Current issues regarding the use of pneumococcal conjugate and polysaccharide vaccines in Australian children.

OBJECTIVE: To present the results of child pneumococcal vaccination studies in the setting of current Australian disease epidemiology and immunization policy, and issues that clinicians should consider in discussions with families. METHODS: This paper includes a narrative review of randomized, controlled, double blind studies and systematic reviews which evaluated the efficacy of child pneumococcal vaccination. RESULTS: 7PCV is expected to prevent > 80% of childhood invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD, includes meningitis, septicaemia/bacteraemia) and the associated mortality. 7PCV may prevent 6% of all pneumonia, 18% of radiographically-defined pneumonia, 6% of all otitis media (OM) and 20%-40% of tympanostomy tube procedures. It may also reduce IPD due to antibiotic-resistant pneumococci, and prevent IPD in unvaccinated individuals. The impact of replacement disease caused by non-vaccine serotypes is not yet known. Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccines given to 2-year-old children may prevent approximately 19% of all and 26% of recurrent OM. CONCLUSION: The Australian Standard Vaccination Schedule recommends universal infant immunization with seven-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (7PCV). Universal infant 7PCV will prevent pneumococcal diseases and deaths. The potential for its impact to be reduced in the long-term by serotype replacement must be closely monitored. Information concerning disease epidemiology, vaccine efficacy and safety, disease risk perception and national costs may prove useful in discussions with families.

Australia↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Antifungal guidelines.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Antifungal Agents↗
PubMed2006

FIELD study.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2↗
PubMed2006

Evaluating medical effectiveness for the california health benefits review program.

An important aspect of the mandate assessments requested by the California legislature is a review of the scientific and medical literature on the medical effectiveness of the proposed health insurance benefit mandate. Although such a review bears many similarities to effectiveness reviews that might be undertaken for publication as research studies, several important differences arise from the requirements of the California legislation. Our reviews are intended to assist the legislators in deciding whether to support a specific mandate to modify health insurance benefits in a particular way. Thus, our assessments focus on how the scientific literature bears on the proposed mandate, which may involve a complicated chain of potential effects leading from altered coverage to ultimate impact on health. Evidence may be available for only some of the links in the chain. Furthermore, not all the evidence may be directly applicable to the diverse population of California or the subpopulation affected by the mandate. The mandate reviews, including the medical effectiveness analyses, may be used in a potentially contentious decision making setting. The legislative calendar requires that they need to be timely, yet they must be as valid, credible, and based on the best information available as possible. The focus on applicability also implies the need for informed, technical decisions concerning the relevance of the articles for the report, and these decisions need to be made as transparent as possible. These goals and constraints yield an approach that differs somewhat from an investigator-initiated review of the literature.

California↗
PubMed2004

VISP and INVEST.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Managing hypertension: state of the science.

Hypertension management is both routine and a challenge. Updated guidelines emphasize the need to achieve increasingly stringent blood pressure goals to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality; however, the blood pressure of many patients who have been diagnosed with hypertension is not well controlled. Treating prehypertension nonpharmacologically may preempt the progression to hypertension, whereas early and aggressive management of hypertension with antihypertensive agents reduces short- and long-term cardiovascular risk. Treatment decisions should follow current guidelines while evaluating recently published clinical studies. When choosing between agents from different therapeutic classes or combining agents, physicians should consider current and targeted blood pressure levels, the patient's demographic profile, the presence or absence of compelling cardiovascular and metabolic indications, other comorbidities, and concurrent medication(s).

Antihypertensive Agents↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Revisiting the hemodialysis dose.

An adequate dose of hemodialysis is currently defined by the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) and European guidelines as a delivered single-pool urea Kt/V (spKt/V) of 1.2 and 1.4, respectively. Results from several studies, in particular the Hemodialysis (HEMO) study, have largely supported the legitimacy of these guidelines, although they may need to be altered or amended for certain patient subgroups. This review discusses several potential changes to current guidelines based on recent clinical outcome studies. The following questions are addressed: 1) Should the dialysis dose for low molecular weight water-soluble solutes (i.e., urea) be normalized by the body distribution volume for urea? 2) Should spKt/V or equilibrated Kt/V (eKt/V) be used for routine monitoring of the hemodialysis dose? 3) Should the dialysis dose for small solutes be dependent on gender? 4) Should the dialysis dose for middle molecules be used in clinical practice? 5) What should be the dialysis dose when using hemodialysis treatment strategies that are more frequent than thrice weekly?

Dialysis Solutions↗
PubMed2005

The journal impact factor: judging a book by its cover.

Journal impact factors have been used to evaluate the quality of the work of an individual author and as a guide to the quality of a given study. Despite a rough correlation between the quality of an article and the impact factor of the journal it is published in, the reader cannot be sure of the value of an individual article without a careful appraisal of its content.

Bibliometrics↗
PubMed2005

Epilepsy in children: the evidence for new antiepileptic drugs.

Childhood epilepsy remains a challenge to treat. Despite the availability of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), >25% of children with childhood epilepsy continue to have seizures. Conventional AEDs have been the mainstay of therapy for many years but are often poorly tolerated and have a tendency to interact with other drugs. Current American Academy of Neurology guidelines support the use of four of the newer AEDs (gabapentin, lamotrigine, topiramate, and oxcarbazepine) as adjunctive treatment of refractory partial seizures in children, based on class I evidence. This paper includes a summary of the results from a recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, which shows that levetiracetam is also effective and well tolerated in this pediatric population, and provides evidence supporting its use in refractory partial seizures in children.

Amines↗