Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2016
Factors Associated With Attrition in Randomized Controlled Trials of Vocal Rehabilitation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
de Campos Moreira Tais, Gadenz Camila Dalbosco, Capobianco Dirce Maria, Figueiró Luciana Rizzieri, Ferigolo Maristela, Vissoci Joao Ricardo N, Barros Helena M T, Cassol Mauriceia, Pietrobon Ricardo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to determine the dropout rates and the reasons for dropout in randomized clinical trials of vocal rehabilitation.
STUDY DESIGN: This study used systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42013003807).
METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials for voice disorders. In June 2015, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Clinical Trials, and AJSLP. The titles and abstracts or full texts of articles were independently analyzed by two reviewers. Study quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) scale. Our initial research base included more than 8491 articles.
RESULTS: A total of 51 articles were obtained using our eligibility criteria. The low-quality studies evaluated had higher dropout rates (odds ratio: 3.3, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-12.9). Studies with healthy patients (45%) or vocal training versus no training (25%) also had higher dropout rates. Methodological issues seemed to have a greater influence on the dropout rates of the studies included in the co-occurrence matrix.
CONCLUSIONS: Dropout rates of approximately 15% occur in randomized clinical trials of speech therapy when assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Studies with lower methodological quality had higher patient loss rates. Methodological and clinical reasons accounted for the highest dropout rates in the studies included in this meta-analysis.
STUDY DESIGN: This study used systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42013003807).
METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials for voice disorders. In June 2015, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Clinical Trials, and AJSLP. The titles and abstracts or full texts of articles were independently analyzed by two reviewers. Study quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) scale. Our initial research base included more than 8491 articles.
RESULTS: A total of 51 articles were obtained using our eligibility criteria. The low-quality studies evaluated had higher dropout rates (odds ratio: 3.3, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-12.9). Studies with healthy patients (45%) or vocal training versus no training (25%) also had higher dropout rates. Methodological issues seemed to have a greater influence on the dropout rates of the studies included in the co-occurrence matrix.
CONCLUSIONS: Dropout rates of approximately 15% occur in randomized clinical trials of speech therapy when assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Studies with lower methodological quality had higher patient loss rates. Methodological and clinical reasons accounted for the highest dropout rates in the studies included in this meta-analysis.