Evidence Hub

Recommendations for clinical research in children presenting to primary care out-of-hours services: a randomised controlled trial with parallel cohort study

A. Weghorst, G. Holtman, Pien I Wolters, Heleen A Russchen, Freek Fickweiler, H. Verkade, Johan Post, K. Vermeulen et al.

BJGP open, 2020

325 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Background Research in primary care is essential, but recruiting children in this setting can be complex and may cause selection bias. Challenges surrounding informed consent, particularly in an acute clinical setting, can undermine feasibility. The off-protocol use of an intervention nearing implementation has become common in pragmatic randomised controlled trials (RCTs) set in primary care. Aim To describe how the informed consent procedure affects study inclusion and to assess how off-protocol medication prescribing affects participant selection in a paediatric RCT. Design & setting A pragmatic RCT evaluating the cost-effectiveness of oral ondansetron in children diagnosed with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in primary care out-of-hours services and a parallel cohort study. Method Consecutive children aged 6 months to 6 years attending primary care out-of-hours services with AGE were evaluated to assess the feasibility of obtaining informed consent, the off-protocol use of ondansetron, and other inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results The RCT's feasibility was reduced by the informed consent procedure because 39.0% (n = 325/834) of children were accompanied by only one parent. GPs prescribed ondansetron off-protocol to 34 children (4.1%) of which 19 children were eligible for the RCT. RCT-eligible children included in the parallel cohort study had fewer risk factors for dehydration than children in the RCT despite similar dehydration assessments by GPs. Conclusion The…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 325 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free