Multiples and parents of multiples prefer same arm randomization of siblings in neonatal trials

被引:20
作者
Bernardo, J. [1 ,2 ]
Nowacki, A. [1 ,3 ]
Martin, R. [2 ,4 ]
Fanaroff, J. M. [2 ,4 ]
Hibbs, A. M. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Case Western Reserve Univ, Cleveland Clin, Lerner Coll Med, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Sch Med, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[3] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Quantitat Hlth Sci, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[4] Rainbow Babies & Childrens Hosp, Div Neonatol, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
RANDOM ALLOCATION; BIRTHS;
D O I
10.1038/jp.2014.192
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: Although common among Neonatal Intensive Care Units, multiples births are randomized inconsistently within trials, which can impact enrollment, analytical approach and trial outcomes. It is not known what randomization approach (same arm, different arm and independent randomization) is preferred by multiples and their families. STUDY DESIGN: Surveys distributed to parents of multiples and adult multiples addressed the preferences on randomization by eliciting the most desired method and likelihood of enrolling twins for each randomization approach. RESULT: Populations included 209 parents and 321 adult multiples. Seventy-eight percent of parents and 59% of multiples prefer same arm placement of multiples over other methods (both P<0.001), which also had highest likelihood of enrollment among both the groups. CONCLUSION: Parents of multiples and adult multiples prefer placement of multiples into same treatment arm in randomized trials, making such methodology a potential way to optimize consent rates while ethically approaching human subject research.
引用
收藏
页码:208 / 213
页数:6
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   Twins: prevalence, problems, and preterm births [J].
Chauhan, Suneet P. ;
Scardo, James A. ;
Hayes, Edward ;
Abuhamad, Alfred Z. ;
Berghella, Vincenzo .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2010, 203 (04) :305-315
[2]   What makes clinical research ethical? [J].
Emanuel, EJ ;
Wendler, D ;
Grady, C .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (20) :2701-2711
[3]   How should randomised trials including multiple pregnancies be analysed? [J].
Gates, S ;
Brocklehurst, P .
BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2004, 111 (03) :213-219
[4]   Comparison of statistical methods for analysis of clustered binary observations [J].
Heo, M ;
Leon, AC .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2005, 24 (06) :911-923
[5]   Accounting for Multiple Births in Neonatal and Perinatal Trials: Systematic Review and Case Study [J].
Hibbs, Anna Maria ;
Black, Dennis ;
Palermo, Lisa ;
Cnaan, Avital ;
Luan, Xianqun ;
Truog, William E. ;
Walsh, Michele C. ;
Ballard, Roberta A. .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2010, 156 (02) :202-208
[6]  
Jonsen AlbertR., 2002, CLIN ETHICS PRACTICA, V5th
[7]   Communication of randomization in childhood leukemia trials [J].
Kodish, E ;
Eder, M ;
Noll, RB ;
Ruccione, K ;
Lange, B ;
Angiolillo, A ;
Pentz, R ;
Zyzanski, S ;
Siminoff, LA ;
Drotar, D .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 291 (04) :470-475
[8]   Informed consent for pediatric research: Is it really possible? [J].
Kodish, E .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2003, 142 (02) :89-90
[9]   Comparing methods of analysing datasets with small clusters: case studies using four paediatric datasets [J].
Marston, Louise ;
Peacock, Janet L. ;
Yu, Keming ;
Brocklehurst, Peter ;
Calvert, Sandra A. ;
Greenough, Anne ;
Marlow, Neil .
PAEDIATRIC AND PERINATAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 23 (04) :380-392
[10]   Lay conceptions of the ethical and scientific justifications for random allocation in clinical trials [J].
Robinson, EJ ;
Kerr, C ;
Stevens, A ;
Lilford, R ;
Braunholtz, D ;
Edwards, S .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2004, 58 (04) :811-824