uncertainty

不确定性
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景/目标:医学指南(GL)中包含的建议为医学专业人员做出有关各种疾病的诊断和治疗的临床决策提供了重要帮助。然而,没有系统的方法来衡量GL的有用性。因此,我们对GL进行了客观评估,以表明其有用性和质量。我们假设对“建议”和“证据”进行简单的数学分析就足够了。方法:作为概念的证明,对《2020年欧洲心脏病学会心血管疾病患者运动心脏病学和运动指南》(SCE指南)进行了数学分析.首先,分析了建议类别(CLASS)和证据水平(LEVEL)(n=159)的频率。然后,计算CLASS下的水平面积以形成确定性指数(CI:-1至+1)。结果:SCE指南中I类(\'要做\')和III类(\'不做\')的频率相对较高(52.2%)。然而,最常见的水平是C(41.2-83.8%),表明SCE指南中的科学证据质量相对较低。SCE指南显示相对较高的CI(0.57):78.4%的确定性和21.6%的不确定性。结论:SCE指南通过建议(CLASS)为决策提供了实质性帮助,而大多数情况下的支持证据(LEVEL)质量较低。这就是新引入的确定性指数所显示的:“质量控制”工具,可以识别GL中的特定区域,并可以促进未来GL的改进。新开发的数学分析可以作为指南的指南,促进对GL的帮助和质量的评估和比较。
    Background/Objectives: The recommendations included in medical guidelines (GLs) provide important help to medical professionals for making clinical decisions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of various diseases. However, there are no systematic methods to measure the helpfulness of GLs. Thus, we developed an objective assessment of GLs which indicates their helpfulness and quality. We hypothesized that a simple mathematical analysis of \'Recommendations\' and \'Evidence\' would suffice. Methods: As a proof of concept, a mathematical analysis was conducted on the \'2020 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines on Sports Cardiology and Exercise in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease Guideline\' (SCE-guideline). First, the frequencies of Classes of Recommendations (CLASS) and the Levels of Evidence (LEVEL) (n = 159) were analysed. Then, LEVEL areas under CLASS were calculated to form a certainty index (CI: -1 to +1). Results: The frequency of CLASS I (\'to do\') and CLASS III (\'not to do\') was relatively high in the SCE-guideline (52.2%). Yet, the most frequent LEVEL was C (41.2-83.8%), indicating only a relatively low quality of scientific evidence in the SCE-guideline. The SCE-guideline showed a relatively high CI (+0.57): 78.4% certainty and 21.6% uncertainty. Conclusions: The SCE-guideline provides substantial help in decision making through the recommendations (CLASS), while the supporting evidence (LEVEL) in most cases is of lower quality. This is what the newly introduced certainty index showed: a tool for \'quality control\' which can identify specific areas within GLs, and can promote the future improvement of GLs. The newly developed mathematical analysis can be used as a Guideline for the Guidelines, facilitating the assessment and comparison of the helpfulness and quality of GLs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:使用新电流源的静电计的新质量保证和控制方法,与静电计指南中公布的方法不同,已被报道。这种电流源使用干电池,在电压方面表现出优异的性能,温度,和时间特征。静电计灵敏度系数可以通过将一个静电计的灵敏度与另一个静电计的灵敏度在两种方法中预先由校准实验室校准的静电计校准系数上进行比较来计算。该指南方法需要在设施中设置两组或更多组电离室和静电计。相比之下,我们的方法不使用电离室;因此,静电计的灵敏度比可以在任何设施中测量。这项研究比较了使用新电流源方法(电流方法)计算的静电计灵敏度因子的不确定性与使用静电计指南中描述的线性加速器(LINAC)和电离室(LINAC方法)计算的不确定度。
    方法:在本研究中,我们使用了日本川口电力公司以前发明的电流源。用三个制造商的静电计测量静电计的灵敏度比。通过乘以静电计校准系数来计算静电计灵敏度因子。电离室为30013(PTW),电流源是在校准条件下从10MVTrueBeamX射线获得的电流。平均值,标准偏差,并计算变异系数。还测量了设置电离室以计算静电计的灵敏度比所需的时间。通过计算静电计灵敏度系数的扩展不确定度来确认准确性。
    结果:LINAC方法的最大变异系数为0.072%。LINAC方法的总时间约为110分钟。当前方法具有0.0055%的最大变异系数,并且所花费的时间小于LINAC方法所花费的时间(35min)的一半,因为在校准条件下没有电离室设置和施加的电压稳定的等待时间。静电计校准系数的扩展不确定度分别为0.36%和0.36%,分别。
    结论:使用电流源的静电计灵敏度因子的新交叉比较方法比指南中描述的线性加速器方法更有效和有用;此外,该方法确保了静电计质量保证和控制的准确性。
    BACKGROUND: A new quality assurance and control method for electrometers using a new current source, different from the method published in the guidelines for electrometers, has been reported. This current source uses dry batteries and exhibits excellent performance in terms of voltage, temperature, and time characteristics. The electrometer sensitivity coefficient can be calculated by comparing the sensitivity of one electrometer with that of another on the electrometer calibration coefficient that has been calibrated by a calibration laboratory in advance in both methods. The guideline method requires two or more sets of ionization chambers and electrometers in the facility. In contrast, our method does not use ionization chambers; therefore, the sensitivity ratio of the electrometer can be measured in any facility. This study compared the uncertainty of the electrometer sensitivity factor calculated using the new current source method (current method) with that calculated using a linear accelerator (LINAC) and ionization chambers (LINAC method) described in the electrometer guidelines.
    METHODS: In this study, we used a current source that we invented previously by Kawaguchi Electric Works in Japan. The sensitivity ratios of the electrometers were measured with three manufacture\'s electrometers. The electrometer sensitivity factor was calculated by multiplying the electrometer calibration coefficient. The ionization chamber was 30013 (PTW), and the current source was the current obtained from 10 MV TrueBeam X-rays under calibration conditions. The mean value, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation were calculated. The time required to set up the ionization chamber for calculating the sensitivity ratio of the electrometer was also measured. The accuracy was confirmed by calculating the expanded uncertainty of the electrometer sensitivity coefficients.
    RESULTS: The LINAC method had a maximum coefficient of variation of 0.072%. The gross time of the LINAC method was approximately 110 min. The current method had a maximum coefficient of variation of 0.0055% and took less than half the time taken by the LINAC method (35 min) because there was no waiting time for the ionization chamber to be set up and the applied voltage to stabilize under calibration conditions. The expanded uncertainties of the electrometer calibration coefficients were 0.36% and 0.36%, respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: The new cross-comparison method for electrometer sensitivity factors using a current source is more efficient and useful than the linear accelerator method described in the guidelines; furthermore, this method ensured accuracy for quality assurance and control of electrometers.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    计量可追溯性的目标是,无论用于测量的体外诊断医疗设备(IVD-MD)如何,在临床样本(CS)中对被测对象具有等效结果。国际标准化组织标准17511定义了建立分配给校准器的值的计量可追溯性的要求,与IVD-MD一起使用的真实性控制材料和人体样品。计量可追溯性的每个步骤都具有与分配给材料的值相关联的不确定性。每个步骤处的不确定性增加了来自先前步骤的不确定性,使得组合的不确定性在每个步骤处变得更大。CS结果的组合不确定性必须满足最大允许不确定性(umaxCS)的分析性能规范(APS)。可以在计量可追溯性校准等级中的步骤之间划分umaxCS,以得出每个步骤的最大允许不确定性的APS。同样,最大可接受的不可交换性偏差的标准可以从umaxCS中得出。确定是否满足umaxCS的挑战之一是确定在临床实验室内操作IVD-MD的可重复性不确定性(uRw)。从内部质量控制数据估计uRw的大多数当前建议都没有使用足够具有代表性的时间间隔来捕获测量结果中所有相关的变异性来源。因此,对uRw的低估是常见的,并且可能影响对当前IVD-MD及其支持的校准层级满足临床护理提供者需求的程度的评估。
    The goal of metrological traceability is to have equivalent results for a measurand in clinical samples (CSs) irrespective of the in-vitro diagnostic medical device (IVD-MD) used for measurements. The International Standards Organization standard 17511 defines requirements for establishing metrological traceability of values assigned to calibrators, trueness control materials and human samples used with IVD-MDs. Each step in metrological traceability has an uncertainty associated with the value assigned to a material. The uncertainty at each step adds to the uncertainty from preceding steps such that the combined uncertainty gets larger at each step. The combined uncertainty for a CS result must fulfil an analytical performance specification (APS) for the maximum allowable uncertainty (umax CS). The umax CS can be partitioned among the steps in a metrological traceability calibration hierarachy to derive the APS for maximum allowable uncertainty at each step. Similarly, the criterion for maximum acceptable noncommutability bias can be derived from the umax CS. One of the challenges in determining if umax CS is fulfilled is determining the repeatability uncertainty (u Rw) from operating an IVD-MD within a clinical laboratory. Most of the current recommendations for estimating u Rw from internal quality control data do not use a sufficiently representative time interval to capture all relevant sources of variability in measurement results. Consequently, underestimation of u Rw is common and may compromise assessment of how well current IVD-MDs and their supporting calibration hierarchies meet the needs of clinical care providers.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:严重疾病的特点是不确定,特别是在老年群体中。患者可能会经历不确定性,家庭照顾者,和卫生专业人员关于各种各样的问题。关于不确定性的经验和管理,有许多证据空白。
    目的:我们旨在确定有关严重疾病不确定感的优先研究领域,以确保未来的研究更好地满足那些受不确定性影响的人的需求,并减少研究效率低下。
    方法:由五个焦点小组组成的快速优先研讨会,以确定研究领域,然后进行排名练习,以优先考虑它们。参与者是照顾包括老年病在内的严重疾病的医疗保健专业人员,姑息治疗,重症监护;研究人员;患者/护理人员代表,和政策制定者。对排名数据进行描述性分析,并对焦点小组成绩单进行定性框架分析。
    结果:34名参与者参加;67%为女性,平均年龄47岁(范围33-67)。最高优先级是不确定性的沟通,15名参与者排名第一(总排名得分为1.59/3)。随后的优先事项是:2)如何应对不确定性;3)医疗保健专业教育/培训;4)优化不确定性的临床方法;5)探索不确定性的深入经验。与不确定性的经验及其影响有关的问题相比,有关不确定性最佳管理的研究问题得到了更高的重视。
    结论:这些共同制作的,以临床为重点的研究重点绘制了有关严重疾病不确定性的关键证据差距.管理不确定性是最紧迫的问题,研究人员应该优先考虑如何最佳地管理不确定性,以减少痛苦,解锁决策瘫痪,改善疾病和护理经验。
    BACKGROUND: Serious illness is characterised by uncertainty, particularly in older age groups. Uncertainty may be experienced by patients, family carers, and health professionals about a broad variety of issues. There are many evidence gaps regarding the experience and management of uncertainty.
    OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify priority research areas concerning uncertainty in serious illness, to ensure that future research better meets the needs of those affected by uncertainty and reduce research inefficiencies.
    METHODS: Rapid prioritisation workshop comprising five focus groups to identify research areas, followed by a ranking exercise to prioritise them. Participants were healthcare professionals caring for those with serious illnesses including geriatrics, palliative care, intensive care; researchers; patient/carer representatives, and policymakers. Descriptive analysis of ranking data and qualitative framework analysis of focus group transcripts was undertaken.
    RESULTS: Thirty-four participants took part; 67% female, mean age 47 (range 33-67). The highest priority was communication of uncertainty, ranked first by 15 participants (overall ranking score 1.59/3). Subsequent priorities were: 2) How to cope with uncertainty; 3) healthcare professional education/training; 4) Optimising clinical approaches to uncertainty; and 5) exploring in-depth experiences of uncertainty. Research questions regarding optimal management of uncertainty were given higher priority than questions about experiences of uncertainty and its impact.
    CONCLUSIONS: These co-produced, clinically-focused research priorities map out key evidence gaps concerning uncertainty in serious illness. Managing uncertainty is the most pressing issue, and researchers should prioritise how to optimally manage uncertainty in order to reduce distress, unlock decision paralysis and improve illness and care experience.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    循证临床指南对于最大限度地提高患者的利益和减少临床不确定性和临床实践中的不一致性至关重要。证据库的差距可以通过常规实践中获得的数据来解决。目前,对于在乳房筛查计划中诊断为非典型病变的妇女的管理,国际上没有共识。这里,我们描述了如何使用Sloane非典型性项目收集的常规NHS乳腺筛查数据来提供管理途径,该途径可最大限度地早期发现癌症,并最大限度地减少对具有不确定恶性潜能的病变的过度调查.与11位临床专家举行为期半天的共识会议,1名来自独立癌症患者的代表,来自NHS英格兰(NHSE)的6名代表,包括来自调试,并举行了2名研究人员,以促进对斯隆非典型项目分析结果的讨论。专家组在筛查发现非典型性妇女的管理方面的主要考虑因素是:(1)随访的频率和目的;(2)与患者的沟通;(3)研究结果的普遍性;(4)劳动力挑战。该小组同意,新证据不支持对非典型性女性进行年度乳房X光检查,无论病变类型如何,或者女人的年龄。继续收集数据对于监测和审计建议的变化至关重要。
    Evidence-based clinical guidelines are essential to maximize patient benefit and to reduce clinical uncertainty and inconsistency in clinical practice. Gaps in the evidence base can be addressed by data acquired in routine practice. At present, there is no international consensus on management of women diagnosed with atypical lesions in breast screening programmes. Here, we describe how routine NHS breast screening data collected by the Sloane atypia project was used to inform a management pathway that maximizes early detection of cancer and minimizes over-investigation of lesions with uncertain malignant potential. A half-day consensus meeting with 11 clinical experts, 1 representative from Independent Cancer Patients\' Voice, 6 representatives from NHS England (NHSE) including from Commissioning, and 2 researchers was held to facilitate discussions of findings from an analysis of the Sloane atypia project. Key considerations of the expert group in terms of the management of women with screen detected atypia were: (1) frequency and purpose of follow-up; (2) communication to patients; (3) generalizability of study results; and (4) workforce challenges. The group concurred that the new evidence does not support annual surveillance mammography for women with atypia, irrespective of type of lesion, or woman\'s age. Continued data collection is paramount to monitor and audit the change in recommendations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:就急病儿童父母的安全联网建议(SNA)的内容和形式达成共识。
    方法:使用在线问卷和临床和研究专家的反馈进行四轮改良的e-Delphi。
    方法:高收入国家的门诊护理。
    方法:来自13个国家的41名专家:3名急诊医师,15名全科医生,4名护士和19名儿科医生。
    结果:专家将SNA的内容定义为对正常,临时诊断的预期病程,诊断不确定性,警报信号,表明需要医疗帮助以及在哪里以及如何找到此类帮助的信息。关于国民账户体系的形式,专家们一致认为,可靠的来源应在每次适当的医疗保健会议上以简短而简单的授权方式口头向SNA提供纸质或数字书面或视频/图像资源,具体到孩子的情况,并寻求父母的确认反馈。
    结论:SNA需要包含有关预期病程的建议,警报信号以及在哪里以及如何找到帮助。它应该由可靠的医疗保健专业人员或数字平台口头提供书面资源。短,简单而具体,SNA需要授权应检查其对建议的理解的父母。父母和专家共同制作的国民账户体系资源的有效性应在不同的环境中进行评估,提供国民账户体系的资源需要最新和可靠的培训。
    Develop a consensus on the content and form of safety netting advice (SNA) for parents of acutely ill children.
    Four-round modified e-Delphi using online questionnaires and feedback among clinical and research experts.
    Ambulatory care in high-income countries.
    Forty-one experts from 13 countries: 3 emergency physicians, 15 general practitioners, 4 nurses and 19 paediatricians.
    The experts defined the content of SNA as advice on the normal, expected disease course of the provisional diagnosis, diagnostic uncertainty, alarm signs that indicate the need for medical help and information on where and how to find such help. Regarding the form of the SNA, the experts agree that a reliable source should give SNA verbally with paper or digital written or video/image resources at every appropriate healthcare encounter in a short and simple empowering fashion, specific to the child\'s situation and seek confirmatory feedback from parents.
    SNA needs to contain advice on the expected disease course, alarm signs and where and how to find help. It should be given verbally with written resources by a reliable healthcare professional or digital platform. Short, simple and specific, SNA needs to empower the parent whose understanding of the advice should be checked. The effectiveness of SNA resources coproduced by parents and experts should be assessed in different settings and those providing SNA require up-to-date and reliable training.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    由于测序数据中肿瘤系统发育推断的不确定性,许多方法推断多个,同一种癌症的系统发育同样合理。总结肿瘤系统发育的解空间T,共识树方法在指定的成对树距离函数下寻求单个最佳代表树S。一个这样的距离函数是祖先-后代(AD)距离[公式:见文本],等于边集的传递闭包的对称差的大小[公式:见文本]和[公式:见文本]。这里,我们表明,找到了肿瘤系统发育T的共识树S,该共识树S使总AD距离∑TεTd(S,T)是NP难的。
    Due to uncertainty in tumor phylogeny inference from sequencing data, many methods infer multiple, equally plausible phylogenies for the same cancer. To summarize the solution space T of tumor phylogenies, consensus tree methods seek a single best representative tree S under a specified pairwise tree distance function. One such distance function is the ancestor-descendant (AD) distance [Formula: see text] , which equals the size of the symmetric difference of the transitive closures of the edge sets [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] . Here, we show that finding a consensus tree S for tumor phylogenies T that minimizes the total AD distance [Formula: see text] is NP-hard.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    实体器官移植后结果的进一步改善将取决于我们将个性化医疗整合到临床常规中的能力。不仅更好的风险分层或改进的诊断,还需要靶向治疗和治疗成功的预测标志物,因为在开发和实施用于预防和治疗同种异体移植物排斥的新疗法方面存在几乎停滞。临床决策支持算法和新型生物标志物在临床实践中的整合将需要不同的推理。拥抱不确定性和概率思维的概念,因为地面真理往往是未知的,工具也是不完善的。这对于医疗保健专业人员之间的沟通很重要,但患者及其护理人员也需要了解个性化医疗固有的不确定性水平。在将研究成果和个性化医疗转化为常规临床护理时,在临床常规的主要方面保持全球共识仍然至关重要,以避免中心和国家之间在护理标准上的进一步差异。只有意见分歧的专家愿意超越自己的信念,才能达成这样的共识,明白没有一个单一的真理,因此能够接受一定程度的不确定性。
    Further improvements of outcome after solid organ transplantation will depend on our ability to integrate personalized medicine in clinical routine. Not only better risk stratification or improved diagnostics, also targeted therapies and predictive markers of treatment success are needed, as there is a virtual standstill in the development and implementation of novel therapies for prevention and treatment of allograft rejection. The integration of clinical decision support algorithms and novel biomarkers in clinical practice will require a different reasoning, embracing concepts of uncertainty and probabilistic thinking as the ground truth is often unknown and the tools imperfect. This is important for communication between healthcare professionals, but patients and their caregivers also need to be informed and educated about the levels of uncertainty inherent to personalized medicine. In the translation of research findings and personalized medicine to routine clinical care, it remains crucial to maintain global consensus on major aspects of clinical routine, to avoid further divergence between centres and countries in the standard of care. Such consensus can only be reached when experts with divergent opinions are willing to transcend their own convictions, understand that there is not one single truth, and thus are able to embrace a level of uncertainty.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:大规模平行测序技术,如全外显子组测序(WES)和全基因组测序(WGS),可能会发现与诊断目的无关的未经请求的发现(UF)。这种技术经常用于小儿发育迟缓(DD)病例的诊断目的。然而,知情同意和归还UF的政策指南并没有很好地解决这些儿童处境中可能出现的具体道德挑战。
    结论:在我们研究小组进行的先前实证研究中,我们发现,有时不确定患有DD的儿童将如何发展,以及他们将来是否可以拥有自主决策的能力。在进行三重奏分析(父母和孩子的DNA都被测序)之前,父母有时会觉得在面对UF的选择时,这让他们陷入了Catch-22的境地。选择同意WES的一个重要原因是为了更深入地了解他们的孩子可能会如何发展。然而,对接收或拒绝UF知识做出负责任的选择,需要一些关于他们孩子未来自主能力发展的想法。这种不希望的Catch-22情况是由特定的策略配置造成的,在该策略配置中,要求父母在进行测序(三重分析)之前对UF进行选择。我们认为,这一发现与重新配置当前WES/WGS的UF返回政策有关,并提出包含两个功能的指南。首先,知情同意过程应该分阶段进行。第二,在DD适合儿童未来自主能力发展的信心水平的情况下,扣留/披露UF需要不同的指导方针。
    结论:当与动态同意程序结合使用时,我们指南的这两个特点可以帮助克服在接受基因组测序以澄清DD的儿童中出现的重大道德挑战.
    Massively parallel sequencing techniques, such as whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS), may reveal unsolicited findings (UFs) unrelated to the diagnostic aim. Such techniques are frequently used for diagnostic purposes in pediatric cases of developmental delay (DD). Yet policy guidelines for informed consent and return of UFs are not well equipped to address specific moral challenges that may arise in these children\'s situations.
    In previous empirical studies conducted by our research group, we found that it is sometimes uncertain how children with a DD will develop and whether they could come to possess capacities for autonomous decision-making in the future. Parents sometimes felt this brought them into a Catch-22 like situation when confronted with choices about UFs before undergoing WES in trio-analysis (both the parents\' and child\'s DNA are sequenced). An important reason for choosing to consent to WES was to gain more insight into how their child might develop. However, to make responsible choices about receiving or declining knowledge of UFs, some idea of their child\'s future development of autonomous capacities is needed. This undesirable Catch-22 situation was created by the specific policy configuration in which parents were required to make choices about UFs before being sequencing (trio-analysis). We argue that this finding is relevant for reconfiguring current policies for return of UFs for WES/WGS and propose guidelines that encompass two features. First, the informed consent process ought to be staged. Second, differing guidelines are required for withholding/disclosing a UF in cases of DD appropriate to the level of confidence there is about the child\'s future developmental of autonomous capacities.
    When combined with a dynamic consent procedure, these two features of our guidelines could help overcome significant moral challenges that present themselves in the situations of children undergoing genomic sequencing for clarifying a DD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    摘要专业声明在生存能力边界指导新生儿复苏阈值。Guillen等人2015年对国际准则的系统回顾。发现23-24周胎龄(GA)婴儿的临床建议之间存在相当大的差异。作者得出结论,所包含数据类型的差异是该道德灰色区域内不同复苏阈值的潜在来源。“声明如何提出支持他们建议的道德考虑,以及这可能是如何解释可变性的,没有得到严格的探索。我们在220-250周GA对25个现行国际新生儿复苏指南进行了混合方法探索性分析。使用修正的扎根理论进行定性分析,得出34种不同的代码,八类,和四个总体主题。三个主题,结果主义,原则性,以权利为基础,由这些伦理框架的核心概念组成。第四个主题,临床推理,描述了咨询实践,医疗管理,结果数据,和预后的不确定性,没有任何道德背景。临床推理的主题出现在25个指南中的22个指南中。十条准则没有任何道德主题。与没有确定的道德主题的指南相比,具有确定的道德主题的指南更有可能推荐舒适护理。并建议在较高的平均GA(22.7周与22.0周,p=0.03)。因此,伦理概念如何纳入指南可能会影响复苏阈值。我们认为,在“灰色地带”中纳入有关复苏的伦理考虑因素的明确讨论将澄清为建议提供信息的价值观,并促进关于随着结局的不断发展,新生儿学应如何接近生存的讨论。
    AbstractProfessional statements guide neonatal resuscitation thresholds at the border of viability. A 2015 systematic review of international guidelines by Guillen et al. found considerable variability between statements\' clinical recommendations for infants at 23-24 weeks gestational age (GA). The authors concluded that differences in the type of data included were one potential source for differing resuscitation thresholds within this \"ethical gray zone.\" How statements present ethical considerations that support their recommendations, and how this may account for variability, has not been as rigorously explored. We performed a mixed-methods exploratory analysis of 25 current international guidelines for neonatal resuscitation at 22+0-25+0 weeks GA. Qualitative analysis using a modified grounded theory yielded 34 distinct codes, eight categories, and four overarching themes. Three themes, consequentialism, principlism, and rights-based, consisted of concepts central to these ethical frameworks. The fourth theme, clinical reasoning, described counseling practices, medical management, outcomes data, and prognostic uncertainty, without any ethical context. The theme of clinical reasoning appeared in 22 of 25 guidelines. Ten guidelines lacked any ethical theme. Guidelines with an identified ethical theme were more likely to recommend comfort care than guidelines without an identified ethical theme, and recommended it at a higher average GA (22.7 weeks vs. 22.0 weeks, p = 0.03). Thus, how ethical concepts are incorporated into guidelines potentially impacts resuscitation thresholds. We argue that inclusion of explicit discussion of ethical considerations surrounding resuscitation in the \"gray zone\" would clarify values that inform recommendations and facilitate discussions about how neonatology ought to approach periviability as outcomes continue to evolve.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号