Tag Archives: Randomized Controlled Trials

Music has charms to soothe a savage breast

Posted on 1 May 2013 by Keith Barrington

William Congreve, The Mourning Bride, 1697: (from Act 1 Scene 1) Musick has Charms to sooth a savage Breast, To soften Rocks, or bend a knotted Oak. I’ve read, that things inanimate have mov’d, And, as with living Souls, have … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged | Leave a comment

More support for SUPPORT

Posted on 25 April 2013 by Keith Barrington

A new editorial in the PNEJM from 2 PhD ethicists. I specify that as they are not neonatologists, nor pediatricians nor yet medical researchers, and have no conflict of interest of any kind as far as I can see. Yet … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Even more SUPPORTive

Posted on 20 April 2013 by Keith Barrington

Another devastating critique of the OHRP ruling regarding the SUPPORT trial is now available. John Lantos, a world leader in pediatric bioethics (and a good friend) has an article  which seems to be open access: ‘OHRP and Public Citizen Are … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

No ethical breakdown here

Posted on 16 April 2013 by Keith Barrington

As I mentioned at the end of my first post about this, the New York Times have jumped into the fray with an editorial entitled ‘An ethical breakdown‘ published today. They take as ‘gospel’ the OHRP findings concerning the study, and show … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

How to show you don’t understand research in critical patients

Posted on 16 April 2013 by Keith Barrington

To continue with my diatribe about the OHRP decision concerning the SUPPORT trial: At one point in the document sent to the University of Alabama, the OHRP quote an editorial by Jay Greenspan: ‘…Although maintaining ranges of hemoglobin oxygen saturation … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Now we will have to know the results of our research before we start the study

Posted on 16 April 2013 by Keith Barrington

The DHHS Office for Human Research Protections has just issued a ridiculous ruling. According to them the consent forms for SUPPORT were not sufficiently clear about risks of blindness in the higher oxygen group, and the risks of death in … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

To blindly go where no man….

Posted on 28 March 2013 by Keith Barrington

Do we really need to blind research projects? And if so which parts of them? There is good empirical data that randomization must be masked, it is important that at the moment a patient is enrolled in a study the … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Breast = best: past your eyes?

Posted on 20 March 2013 by Keith Barrington

The title is from one of those bad punny jokes that you never forget, about taking a bath in milk (pasteurized? No just up to my chin. Boom, boom). For the readers of this blog who are not native English … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Pacifiers (soothers, dummies) are friendly to babies

Posted on 19 March 2013 by Keith Barrington

The baby friendly initiative has been a force for improving breast-feeding rates, with many sensible parts to the program. Unfortunately some of it isn’t evidence based, such as the prohibition of what I will call soothers. I’m originally from England … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Oh No; not renal dose dopamine again!

Posted on 13 March 2013 by Keith Barrington

This is the sort of thing that really irritates me: If you report ‘we did X, and Y happened’ the obvious question should be, ‘what would have happened if you didn’t do X?’ That is called having controls! It is … Continue reading →

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 3 Comments