USPSTF不能推荐或反对脂质筛查以确定儿童多因素血脂异常:没有推荐并非没有后果。

Evidence-Based Medicine Pub Date : 2017-10-01 Epub Date: 2017-08-17 DOI:10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585
Sarah D de Ferranti, Radley C Sheldrick
{"title":"USPSTF不能推荐或反对脂质筛查以确定儿童多因素血脂异常:没有推荐并非没有后果。","authors":"Sarah D de Ferranti,&nbsp;Radley C Sheldrick","doi":"10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Paediatric lipid screening has been recommended for decades to identify youth at increased risk for early atherosclerotic disease but is controversial and not universally adopted. A 2016 review by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found inadequate evidence to recommend for or against lipid screening in childhood. In this Perspective article, we examine this controversial and important topic more broadly. We consider whether the USPSTF framework is asking the right questions, and whether the answers to these questions should be valued equally, whether the USPSTF questions are answerable and by what types of evidence and whether the burden of proof is appropriate. We argue that using a broader framework that includes the magnitude of potential benefits and harms, considering more types of evidence beyond randomised controlled trials, and more fully incorporating patient and parent perspectives could lead to more practical and more widely applicable guidance for practitioners, guide future research priorities and be more inclusive of patient priorities.</p>","PeriodicalId":12182,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"162-163"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"USPSTF is unable to recommend for or against lipid screening to identify multifactorial dyslipidaemia in childhood: no recommendation is not without consequences.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah D de Ferranti,&nbsp;Radley C Sheldrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Paediatric lipid screening has been recommended for decades to identify youth at increased risk for early atherosclerotic disease but is controversial and not universally adopted. A 2016 review by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found inadequate evidence to recommend for or against lipid screening in childhood. In this Perspective article, we examine this controversial and important topic more broadly. We consider whether the USPSTF framework is asking the right questions, and whether the answers to these questions should be valued equally, whether the USPSTF questions are answerable and by what types of evidence and whether the burden of proof is appropriate. We argue that using a broader framework that includes the magnitude of potential benefits and harms, considering more types of evidence beyond randomised controlled trials, and more fully incorporating patient and parent perspectives could lead to more practical and more widely applicable guidance for practitioners, guide future research priorities and be more inclusive of patient priorities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-Based Medicine\",\"volume\":\"22 5\",\"pages\":\"162-163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-Based Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/8/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/8/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

几十年来,儿科脂质筛查一直被推荐用于识别早期动脉粥样硬化疾病风险增加的青少年,但存在争议,未被普遍采用。美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF) 2016年的一项审查发现,推荐或反对儿童脂质筛查的证据不足。在这篇Perspective文章中,我们将更广泛地研究这个有争议的重要主题。我们考虑USPSTF框架是否提出了正确的问题,这些问题的答案是否应该得到同等的重视,USPSTF的问题是否可以回答,以及通过什么类型的证据以及举证责任是否适当。我们认为,使用一个更广泛的框架,包括潜在的益处和危害的大小,考虑随机对照试验之外的更多类型的证据,更充分地结合患者和家长的观点,可能会为从业者提供更实用、更广泛适用的指导,指导未来的研究重点,并更包容患者的优先事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
USPSTF is unable to recommend for or against lipid screening to identify multifactorial dyslipidaemia in childhood: no recommendation is not without consequences.

Paediatric lipid screening has been recommended for decades to identify youth at increased risk for early atherosclerotic disease but is controversial and not universally adopted. A 2016 review by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found inadequate evidence to recommend for or against lipid screening in childhood. In this Perspective article, we examine this controversial and important topic more broadly. We consider whether the USPSTF framework is asking the right questions, and whether the answers to these questions should be valued equally, whether the USPSTF questions are answerable and by what types of evidence and whether the burden of proof is appropriate. We argue that using a broader framework that includes the magnitude of potential benefits and harms, considering more types of evidence beyond randomised controlled trials, and more fully incorporating patient and parent perspectives could lead to more practical and more widely applicable guidance for practitioners, guide future research priorities and be more inclusive of patient priorities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信