Final Research Report
View this project's final research report.
More to Explore...
Related PCORI Dissemination and Implementation Project
Results of This Project
Related Journal Citations
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:
- The reviewers requested an expanded discussion of how the researchers managed missing data in this study. The researchers responded that there were only 23 infants missing data on weaning off home oxygen therapy (HOT), and that these infants did not significantly differ from completers by treatment group, most demographic variables, or illness severity.
- Reviewers also questioned participants’ adherence to the treatment protocol, since most of the participants in the intervention group did not meet the goal of recorded home oximetry, which was to report their infants’ oxygen use measures at least four times per month. The researchers said that they tried to encourage the participants to respond every four to seven days but did not want to “pester” the participants to consistently meet that number. This issue is discussed in the exploratory analyses related to feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.
- The reviewers suggested it would be better to measure duration of home oxygen use from the time discharged premature infants came home instead of from the first outpatient visit. The researchers agreed and reanalyzed their primary endpoint using hospital discharge date as the start of HOT.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
^Lawrence Rhein, MD, MPH, was affiliated with Children's Hospital Boston when this project was initially awarded.
- Has Results