Book contents
- Fetal Therapy
- Fetal Therapy
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Section 1: General Principles
- Section 2: Fetal Disease: Pathogenesis and Treatment
- Section III: The Future
- Chapter 53 Fetal Therapy and Translational Studies: Global Alignment, Coordination, and Collaboration in Perinatal Research – the Global Obstetrics Network (GONet) Initiative
- Chapter 54 Congenital Anomaly Registers: The European Experience
- Chapter 55 A Challenge for Prenatal Diagnosis in Developing Countries: Zika Virus as an Exemplar
- Index
- References
Chapter 53 - Fetal Therapy and Translational Studies: Global Alignment, Coordination, and Collaboration in Perinatal Research – the Global Obstetrics Network (GONet) Initiative
from Section III: - The Future
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2019
Book contents
- Fetal Therapy
- Fetal Therapy
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Section 1: General Principles
- Section 2: Fetal Disease: Pathogenesis and Treatment
- Section III: The Future
- Chapter 53 Fetal Therapy and Translational Studies: Global Alignment, Coordination, and Collaboration in Perinatal Research – the Global Obstetrics Network (GONet) Initiative
- Chapter 54 Congenital Anomaly Registers: The European Experience
- Chapter 55 A Challenge for Prenatal Diagnosis in Developing Countries: Zika Virus as an Exemplar
- Index
- References
Summary
Medical interventions should ideally only be offered if we know that they help the patient in improving outcome by reducing morbidity and mortality. At present, there is consensus that their effectiveness should be evaluated before incorporation into guidelines.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Fetal TherapyScientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits, pp. 561 - 569Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Hills, RK, Daniels, J. Assessing new interventions in women’s health. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2006; 20: 713–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Altman, DG. Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. BMJ. 1996; 313: 5701.Google Scholar
Lasagna, L. Problems in publication of clinical trial methodology. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1979; 25: 751–753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macleod, MR, Michie, S, Roberts, I, Dirnagl, U, Chalmers, I, Ioannidis, JPA, et al. Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet. 2014; 383: 101–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meher, S, Alfirevic, Z. Choice of primary outcomes in randomised trials and systematic reviews evaluating interventions for preterm birth prevention: a systematic review. BJOG. 2014; 121: 1188–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirwan, JR, Minnock, P, Adebajo, A, Bresnihan, B, Choy, E, de Wit, M, et al. Patient perspective: fatigue as a recommended patient centred outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007; 34: 1174–7.Google Scholar
Kenyon, SL, Taylor, DJ, Tarnow-Mordi, W, ORACLE Collaborative Group. Broad-spectrum antibiotics for preterm, prelabour rupture of fetal membranes: the ORACLE I randomised trial. Lancet. 2001; 357: 979–88.Google Scholar
Kenyon, S, Pike, K, Jones, DR, Brocklehurst, P, Marlow, N, Salt, A, Taylor, DJ. Childhood outcomes after prescription of antibiotics to pregnant women with spontaneous preterm labour: 7-year follow-up of the ORACLE II trial. Lancet. 2008; 372: 1319–27.Google Scholar
Raza, A, Chien, PF, Khan, KS. Multicentre randomised controlled trials in obstetrics and gynaecology: an analysis of trends over three decades. BJOG. 2009; 116: 1130–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuroki, LM, Allsworth, JE, Peipert, JF. Methodology and analytic techniques used in clinical research: associations with journal impact factor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114: 877–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thom, EA, Rouse, DJ, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development maternal-fetal medicine units network. What we have learned about conducting randomized controlled trials in the NICHD MFMU network. Semin Perinatol. 2003; 27: 253–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network Writing Group. Causes of death among stillbirths. JAMA. 2011; 306: 2459–68.Google Scholar
Farmer, DL, Thom, EA, Brock, JW, Burrows, PK, Johnson, MP, Howell, LJ, et al. The management of Myelomeningocele Study: full cohort 30-month pediatric outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 218: 256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manuck, TA, Watkins, WS, Esplin, MS, Biggio, J, Bukowski, R, Parry, S, et al. Pharmacogenomics of 17-alpha hydroxyprogesterone caproate for recurrent preterm birth: a case-control study. BJOG. 2018; 125: 343–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dukes, KA, Burd, L, Elliott, AJ, Fifer, WP, Folkerth, RD, Hankins, GD et al. The safe passage study: design, methods, recruitment, and follow-up approach. Paediatr Perinatal Epidemiol. 2014; 28: 455–65.Google Scholar
Hannah, ME, Hannah, WJ, Hewson, SA, Hodnett, ED, Saigal, S, Willan, AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet. 2000; 356: 1375–83.Google Scholar
Murphy, KE, Hannah, ME, Willan, AR, Hewson, SA, Ohlsson, A, Kelly, EN, et al. Multiple courses of antenatal corticosteroids for preterm birth (MACS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008; 20: 2143–51.Google Scholar
Magee, LA, von Dadelszen, P, Rey, E, Ross, S, Asztalos, E, Kellie, E, et al. Less-tight versus tight control of hypertension in pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372: 407–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poston, L, Briley, AL, Seed, PT, Kelly, FJ, Shennan, AH, Vitamins in Pre-eclampsia (VIP) Trial consortium. Vitamin C and vitamin E in pregnant women at risk for pre-eclampsia (VIP trial): randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2006; 367: 1145–54.Google Scholar
Norman, JE, Mackenzie, F, Owen, P, Mactier, H, Hanretty, K, Cooper, S, et al. Progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth in twin pregnancy (STOPPIT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2009; 373: 2034–40.Google Scholar
Shennan, AH, Crawshaw, S, Briley, A, Seed, P, Jones, G, Poston, L. A randomised controlled trial of metronidazole for the prevention of preterm birth in women positive for cervico-vaginal fetal fibronectin: the PREMET Study. BJOG. 2006; 113: 65–74.Google Scholar
Groom, KM, Shennan, AH, Jones, BA, Seed, P, Bennett, P. Randomised double blind placebo controlled trial of rofecoxib (a cox-2 specific prostaglandin inhibitor) for the prevention of preterm delivery in women at high risk. BJOG. 2005; 112: 725–30.Google Scholar
Comparative Obstetric Mobile Epidural Trial (COMET) Study Group UK. Effect of low-dose mobile versus traditional epidural techniques on mode of delivery: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2001: 358: 19–23.Google Scholar
Fisk, NM, Atun, R. Market failure and the poverty of new drugs in maternal health. PLoS Med. 2008; 5: e22.Google Scholar
Mol, BW, Ruifrok, AE. Global alignment, coordination and collaboration in perinatal research: the Global Obstetrics Network (GONet) Initiative. Am J Perinatol. 2013; 30: 163–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Chalmers, I, Bracken, MB, Djulbegovic, B, Garattini, S, Grant, J, Gulmezoglu, AM, et al. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. Lancet. 2014; 383: 156–65.Google Scholar
Schuit, E, Stock, S, Rode, L, Rouse, DJ, Lim, AC, Norman, JE. Effectiveness of progestogens to improve perinatal outcome in twin pregnancies: an individual participant data meta-analysis. BJOG. 2015; 122: 27–37.Google Scholar
Combs, CA, Schuit, E, Caritis, SN, Lim, AC, Garite, TJ, Maurel, K, et al. 17-hypdroxyprogesterone caproate in triplet pregnancy: an individual patient data meta-analysis. BJOG. 2016; 123: 682–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
The International Weight Management in Pregnancy (i-WIP) Collaborative Group. Effect of diet and physical activity based interventions in pregnancy on gestational weight gain and pregnancy outcomes: meta-analysis of inividual participant data from randomised trials. BMJ. 2017; 358: j3119.Google Scholar
Van Oostwaard, MF, Langenveld, J, Schuit, E, Papatsonis, DNM, Brown, MA, Byaruhanga, RN, et al. Recurrence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: an individual patient data metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 212: 624.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schuit, E, Amer-Wahlin, I, Ojala, K, Vayssière, C, Westerhuis, MEMH, Maršál, K, et al. Effectiveness of electronic fetal monitoring with additional ST analysis in vertex singleton pregnancies at >36 weeks of gestation: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 208: 187. e1–87. e13.Google Scholar
Cheong-See, F, Schuit, E, Arroyo-Manzano, D, Khalil, A, Barrett, J, Joseph, KS, et al. Prospective risk of stillbirth and neonatal complications in twin pregnancies: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016; 354: i4353.Google Scholar
PROMPT: Prospective Meta-Analysis for Pessary Trials. Protocol registered in PROSPERO [cited March 2018]. www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018067740.Google Scholar
Ganzevoort, W, Alfirevic, Z, von Dadelszen, P, Kenny, L, Papageorghiou, A, van Wassenaer-Leemhuis, , et al. STRIDER: Sildenafil Therapy In Dismal prognosis Early-onset intrauterine growth Restriction—a protocol for a systematic review with individual participant data and aggregate data meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Syst Rev. 2014; 3: 23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williamson, PR, Altman, DG, Blazeby, JM, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012; 13: 132.Google Scholar
Kirkham, JJ, Boers, M, Tugwell, P, Clarke, M, Williamson, PR. Outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis randomised trials over the last 50 years. Trials. 2013; 14: 324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khan, K. The CROWN Initiative: journal editors invite researchers to develop core outcomes in women’s health. BJOG. 2014; 121: 1181–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van ‘t Hooft, J, Duffy, JM, Daly, M, Williamson, PR, Meher, S, Thom, E, et al. A core outcome set for evaluation of interventions to prevent preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 127: 49–58.Google Scholar
Al Wattar, BH, Tamilselvan, K, Khan, R, Kelso, A, Sinha, A, Pirie, AM, et al. Development of a core outcome set for epilepsy in pregnancy (E-CORE): a national multi stakeholder modified Delphi consensus study. BJOG. 2017; 124: 661–7.Google Scholar
Dos Santos, F, Drymiotou, S, Antequera Martin, A, et al. Development of a core outcome set for trials on induction of labour: an international multistakeholder Delphi study. BJOG. 2018; 125: 1673–80.Google Scholar
Van ‘t Hooft, J, Alfirevic, Z, Asztalos, EV, Biggio, JR, Dugoff, , Hoffman, M, et al. CROWN initiative and preerm birth prevention: researchers and editors commit to implement core outcome sets. BJOG. 2017; 125: 8–11.Google Scholar