The future

Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative

on behalf of the GONet collaborators

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Introduction Medical interventions should only be offered if there is evidence that they help the patient. At present, there is consensus that their effectiveness should be evaluated before incorporation into guidelines. Since the inception of fetal medicine as a subspecialty and the application of in-utero treatments for fetal therapy, there have been cohort studies presented. Initially these cohort series (mainly retrospective) were based on experiences from tertiary centers but in the last five to ten years there has been more of a focus on “population-based” cohort studies that at least have accurate denominator data from which to calculate outcomes. Critical appraisal of the literature and appraisal of fetal therapy has been aided by performing systematic reviews and, where practicable, meta-analysis of outcomes. However, although such methods are informative they summate evidence from relatively small and often heterogeneous case cohort studies. The randomized clinical trial is considered to be the best research tool to evaluate the effectiveness of medical interventions, and is the widely acknowledged design of choice for evaluating medical and surgical treatments [1 – 3].

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationFetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages433-439
Number of pages7
ISBN (Print)9780511997778, 9781107012134
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2009

Fingerprint

Fetal Therapies
Obstetrics
Cohort Studies
Research
Meta-Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Medicine
Guidelines
Therapeutics
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

on behalf of the GONet collaborators (2009). The future: Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative. In Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits (pp. 433-439). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511997778.044

The future : Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative. / on behalf of the GONet collaborators.

Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits. Cambridge University Press, 2009. p. 433-439.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

on behalf of the GONet collaborators 2009, The future: Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative. in Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits. Cambridge University Press, pp. 433-439. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511997778.044
on behalf of the GONet collaborators. The future: Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative. In Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits. Cambridge University Press. 2009. p. 433-439 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511997778.044
on behalf of the GONet collaborators. / The future : Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative. Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits. Cambridge University Press, 2009. pp. 433-439
@inbook{c6d4812f3b014bef8db8d46beeb03976,
title = "The future: Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative",
abstract = "Introduction Medical interventions should only be offered if there is evidence that they help the patient. At present, there is consensus that their effectiveness should be evaluated before incorporation into guidelines. Since the inception of fetal medicine as a subspecialty and the application of in-utero treatments for fetal therapy, there have been cohort studies presented. Initially these cohort series (mainly retrospective) were based on experiences from tertiary centers but in the last five to ten years there has been more of a focus on “population-based” cohort studies that at least have accurate denominator data from which to calculate outcomes. Critical appraisal of the literature and appraisal of fetal therapy has been aided by performing systematic reviews and, where practicable, meta-analysis of outcomes. However, although such methods are informative they summate evidence from relatively small and often heterogeneous case cohort studies. The randomized clinical trial is considered to be the best research tool to evaluate the effectiveness of medical interventions, and is the widely acknowledged design of choice for evaluating medical and surgical treatments [1 – 3].",
author = "{on behalf of the GONet collaborators} and Mol, {Ben W.} and Kilby, {Mark D.} and Elizabeth Asztalos and Gustaaf Dekker and Fabio Facchinetti and {Metin G{\"u}lmezoglu}, A. and Laura Magee and Mol, {Ben W.} and Jonathan Morris and Jane Norman and Lucilla Poston and George Saade and Andrew Shennan and Elizabeth Thom and {Von Dadelszen}, Peter and Leung, {Tak Yeung} and Mario Merialdi and Zarko Alfirevic",
year = "2009",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9780511997778.044",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780511997778",
pages = "433--439",
booktitle = "Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - The future

T2 - Fetal therapy and translational studies: Global alignment, coordination, and collaboration in perinatal research: The global obstetrics network (GONet) initiative

AU - on behalf of the GONet collaborators

AU - Mol, Ben W.

AU - Kilby, Mark D.

AU - Asztalos, Elizabeth

AU - Dekker, Gustaaf

AU - Facchinetti, Fabio

AU - Metin Gülmezoglu, A.

AU - Magee, Laura

AU - Mol, Ben W.

AU - Morris, Jonathan

AU - Norman, Jane

AU - Poston, Lucilla

AU - Saade, George

AU - Shennan, Andrew

AU - Thom, Elizabeth

AU - Von Dadelszen, Peter

AU - Leung, Tak Yeung

AU - Merialdi, Mario

AU - Alfirevic, Zarko

PY - 2009/1/1

Y1 - 2009/1/1

N2 - Introduction Medical interventions should only be offered if there is evidence that they help the patient. At present, there is consensus that their effectiveness should be evaluated before incorporation into guidelines. Since the inception of fetal medicine as a subspecialty and the application of in-utero treatments for fetal therapy, there have been cohort studies presented. Initially these cohort series (mainly retrospective) were based on experiences from tertiary centers but in the last five to ten years there has been more of a focus on “population-based” cohort studies that at least have accurate denominator data from which to calculate outcomes. Critical appraisal of the literature and appraisal of fetal therapy has been aided by performing systematic reviews and, where practicable, meta-analysis of outcomes. However, although such methods are informative they summate evidence from relatively small and often heterogeneous case cohort studies. The randomized clinical trial is considered to be the best research tool to evaluate the effectiveness of medical interventions, and is the widely acknowledged design of choice for evaluating medical and surgical treatments [1 – 3].

AB - Introduction Medical interventions should only be offered if there is evidence that they help the patient. At present, there is consensus that their effectiveness should be evaluated before incorporation into guidelines. Since the inception of fetal medicine as a subspecialty and the application of in-utero treatments for fetal therapy, there have been cohort studies presented. Initially these cohort series (mainly retrospective) were based on experiences from tertiary centers but in the last five to ten years there has been more of a focus on “population-based” cohort studies that at least have accurate denominator data from which to calculate outcomes. Critical appraisal of the literature and appraisal of fetal therapy has been aided by performing systematic reviews and, where practicable, meta-analysis of outcomes. However, although such methods are informative they summate evidence from relatively small and often heterogeneous case cohort studies. The randomized clinical trial is considered to be the best research tool to evaluate the effectiveness of medical interventions, and is the widely acknowledged design of choice for evaluating medical and surgical treatments [1 – 3].

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924215904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84924215904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9780511997778.044

DO - 10.1017/CBO9780511997778.044

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780511997778

SN - 9781107012134

SP - 433

EP - 439

BT - Fetal Therapy: Scientific Basis and Critical Appraisal of Clinical Benefits

PB - Cambridge University Press

ER -