			Home About us Contact

Multicentre Collaboration (multicentre + collaboration)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	50%

Selected Abstracts

Psycho-educational interventions for children and young people with Type 1 diabetes

DIABETIC MEDICINE, Issue 9 2006
H. R. Murphy
Abstract Background, A systematic review of the literature in 2000 revealed numerous methodological shortcomings in education research, but in recent years progress has been made in the quantity and quality of psycho-educational intervention studies. Summary of contents, This review focuses on diabetes education programmes developed for children, young people and their families in the past 5 years. A comprehensive review of the literature identified 27 articles describing the evaluation of 24 psycho-educational interventions. Data summary tables compare the key features of these, and comparisons are made between individual, group and family-based interventions. Effect sizes are calculated for nine of the randomized studies. Three research questions are posed: firstly has the recent literature addressed the problems highlighted in the previous review; secondly is there sufficient evidence to recommend adaptation of a particular programme; and, finally, what do we still need to do? Conclusions, Progress in the quality and quantity of educational research has not resulted in improved effectiveness of interventions. There is still insufficient evidence to recommend adaptation of a particular educational programme and no programme that has been proven effective in randomized studies for those with poor glycaemic control. To develop a range of effective educational interventions, further research involving larger sample sizes with multicentre collaboration is required. [source]

Forming a national multicentre collaboration to conduct clinical trials: Increasing high-quality research in the drug and alcohol field

DRUG AND ALCOHOL REVIEW, Issue 5 2010
ROB SANSON-FISHER
Abstract Issues. There is a shortage of high-quality intervention-based evidence in the drug and alcohol misuse field. That is, evidence based on replicated effects using rigorous methodology, to establish a causal knowledge base around ethical, cost-effective methods relevant to clinical practice. The knowledge base in this field is limited participant recruitment challenges; difficulty generalising results from single-centre studies; lack of research culture; issues in managing research teams; incentives for descriptive research; and limited expertise in research design and working in multidisciplinary teams. Approach. An Australian national multicentre collaboration is proposed to overcome these barriers, and reduce the burden of drug and alcohol misuse by increasing the number of high-quality clinical trials in this field. It would involve: selecting a representative sample of centres nation-wide with expertise in specific drug and alcohol issues; creating an expert multidisciplinary team to facilitate clinical trials; simultaneous recruitment and implementation of clinical trials across centres; establishing a virtual infrastructure; forming an independent data-integrity and methodology review panel; and attracting and allocating funding for clinical trials. Implications. The ability to allocate funding, the involvement of multidisciplinary experts in drug and alcohol research, and the establishment of infrastructure and procedures are likely to result in the national multicentre group's capacity to prescribe the type of research conducted under its auspices. Conclusion. The proposed initiative is likely to increase the volume of high-quality clinical trials in the Australian drug and alcohol field, a key step towards reducing the burden of drug and alcohol misuse.[Sanson-Fisher R, Brand M, Shakeshaft A, Haber P, Day C, Conigrave K, Mattick R, Lintzeris N, Teesson M. Forming a national multicentre collaboration to conduct clinical trials: Increasing high-quality research in the drug and alcohol field. Drug Alcohol Rev 2010;29;469,474] [source]

Anaphylaxis: Clinical concepts and research priorities

EMERGENCY MEDICINE AUSTRALASIA, Issue 2 2006
Simon GA Brown
Abstract Anaphylaxis is a severe immediate-type hypersensitivity reaction characterized by life-threatening upper airway obstruction bronchospasm and hypotension. Although many episodes are easy to diagnose by the combination of characteristic skin features with other organ effects, this is not always the case and a workable clinical definition of anaphylaxis and useful biomarkers of the condition have been elusive. A recently proposed consensus definition is ready for prospective validation. The cornerstones of management are the supine position, adrenaline and volume resuscitation. An intramuscular dose of adrenaline is generally recommended to initiate treatment. If additional adrenaline is required, then a controlled intravenous infusion might be more efficacious and safer than intravenous bolus administration. Additional bronchodilator treatment with continuous salbutamol and corticosteroids are used for severe and/or refractory bronchospasm. Aggressive volume resuscitation, selective vasopressors, atropine (for bradycardia), inotropes that bypass the ,-adrenoreceptor and bedside echocardiographic assessment should be considered for hypotension that is refractory to treatment. Management guidelines continue to be opinion- and consensus-based, with retrospective studies accounting for the vast majority of clinical research papers on the topic. The clinical spectrum of anaphylaxis including major disease subgroups requires clarification, and validated scoring systems and outcome measures are needed to enable good-quality prospective observational studies and randomized controlled trials. A systematic approach with multicentre collaboration is required to improve our understanding and management of this disease. [source]