BACKGROUND: The setting of a randomized trial can determine whether its findings are generalizable and can therefore apply to different settings. The contribution of low- and middle-income... Show moreBACKGROUND: The setting of a randomized trial can determine whether its findings are generalizable and can therefore apply to different settings. The contribution of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to neurosurgical randomized trials has not been systematically described before.OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic analysis of design characteristics and methodology, funding source, and interventions studied between trials led by and/or conducted in high-income countries (HICs) vs LMICs.METHODS: From January 2003 to July 2016, English-language trials with >5 patients assessing any one neurosurgical procedure against another procedure, nonsurgical treatment, or no treatment were retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Income classification for each country was assessed using the World Bank Atlas method.RESULTS: A total of 73.3% of the 397 studies that met inclusion criteria were led by HICs, whereas 26.7% were led by LMICs. Of the 106 LMIC-led studies, 71 were led by China. If China is excluded, only 8.8% were led by LMICs. HIC-led trials enrolled a median of 92 patients vs a median of 65 patients in LMIC-led trials. HIC-led trials enrolled from 7.6 sites vs 1.8 sites in LMIC-led studies. Over half of LMIC-led trials were institutionally funded (54.7%). The majority of both HIC- and LMIC-led trials evaluated spinal neurosurgery, 68% and 71.7%, respectively.CONCLUSION: We have established that there is a substantial disparity between HICs and LMICs in the number of published neurosurgical trials. A concerted effort to invest in research capacity building in LMICs is an essential step towards ensuring context- and resource-specific high-quality evidence is generated. Show less
Background: Multiproblem families are multi-users of psychosocial and health care services, but little is known about factors associated with their care utilization in the general population. The... Show moreBackground: Multiproblem families are multi-users of psychosocial and health care services, but little is known about factors associated with their care utilization in the general population. The aim of this study was to assess which factors were associated with the overall and psychosocial care use of two members—i.e., child and parent—of each multiproblem family. Methods: During well-child visits or psychosocial care, we identified 354 children and their parents who had problems in several life domains (response 69.1%). We used multivariate stepwise backward logistic regression analyses to identify the factors related to their use of overall and psychosocial care. Results: A child's overall care use was associated with greater social support from family and friends (odds ratio, OR, 95% confidence interval, CI; OR = 1.05, CI = 1.01–1.08) compared to less perceived social support; and with more psychosocial problems in the child (OR= 1.84, CI = 1.04–3.24). Child's psychosocial care use was more likely among older children (OR = 1.94, CI = 1.20–3.15); greater social support by family and friend (OR = 1.03, CI = 1.00–1.06); more psychosocial problems (OR = 1.75, CI = 1.04–2.97); and when there were more parenting concerns (OR = 1.19, CI = 1.06–1.33). Parental overall and psychosocial care use was more likely when the family experienced a higher number of life events (OR = 1.27, CI = 1.17–1.38, and OR = 1.39, CI = 1.25–1.55). Conclusions: Care use in multiproblem families is related to family factors as well as psychosocial problems. It may be possible to use these family risk factors to identify such families early, whose intensive care use is possibly explained by the relationship with inadequate use of social support. Show less
