Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials examining psychological interventions for pediatric procedural pain: Recommendations for quality improvement

Uman, Lindsay S., Chambers, Christine T., McGrath, Patrick J., Kisely, Stephen, Matthews, Debora and Hayton, Kelly (2010) Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials examining psychological interventions for pediatric procedural pain: Recommendations for quality improvement. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35 7: 693-703. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsp104


Author Uman, Lindsay S.
Chambers, Christine T.
McGrath, Patrick J.
Kisely, Stephen
Matthews, Debora
Hayton, Kelly
Title Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials examining psychological interventions for pediatric procedural pain: Recommendations for quality improvement
Journal name Journal of Pediatric Psychology   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0146-8693
1465-735X
Publication date 2010-08
Year available 2009
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1093/jpepsy/jsp104
Volume 35
Issue 7
Start page 693
End page 703
Total pages 11
Place of publication Oxford, United Kingdom
Publisher Oxford University Press
Collection year 2011
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Objective
Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) support the efficacy of psychological interventions for procedural pain management. However, methodological limitations (e.g., inadequate randomization) have affected the quality of this research, thereby weakening RCT findings.

Methods
Detailed quality coding was conducted on 28 RCTs included in a systematic review of psychological interventions for pediatric procedural pain.

Results

The majority of RCTs were of poor to low quality (criteria reported in <50 of RCTs). Commonly reported criteria addressed study background, conditions, statistical analyses, and interpretation of results. Commonly non-reported criteria included treatment administration, evaluation of treatment efficacy (effect sizes, summary statistics, intention-to-treat analyses), caregiver demographics, follow-up, and participant flow. Quality was greater in more recent trials, and did not vary by journal type (psychology vs. medical).

Conclusion

Despite poor quality ratings, quality reporting in psychological RCTs for pediatric procedural pain has improved over time. Recommendations for quality enhancement are provided. © 2009 The Author. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Pediatric Psychology. All rights reserved.
Keyword Adolescents
Children
Consort
Pain
Randomized Controlled Trial
Revised Consort Statement
Clinical-trials
Journals
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Queensland Centre for Health Data Services
Official 2011 Collection
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 8 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 11 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Sun, 08 Aug 2010, 00:03:40 EST