TY - JOUR T1 - Review: commonly recommended well-child care interventions are not supported by evidence JF - Evidence Based Medicine JO - Evid Based Med SP - 117 LP - 117 DO - 10.1136/ebm.10.4.117 VL - 10 IS - 4 A2 - , Y1 - 2005/08/01 UR - http://ebm.bmj.com/content/10/4/117.abstract N2 - Moyer VA, Butler M. Gaps in the evidence for well-child care: a challenge to our profession. Pediatrics 2004;114:1511–21.OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text 
 
 Q What is the evidence base for commonly recommended clinical preventive services for children? Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care ★★★★★★☆ Paediatrics ★★★★★★☆ Data sources: Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ACP Journal Club, PsycINFO, reference lists, proceedings of the Pediatric Academic Societies (1997–2003), internet, and contact with experts. Study selection and assessment: high quality systematic reviews were sought. Randomized and controlled clinical trials published after a review’s search dates were then sought. If no reviews existed, clinical trials were sought for all dates. Studies and reviews had to evaluate a well-child care intervention in healthy children between birth and 18–21 years of age. Exclusion criteria: studies assessing only change in health knowledge and attitudes, studies in non-clinical settings (eg, schools), and studies using tests for diagnosis or management rather than screening. Outcomes: prevention of disease/disability, improvements in health/wellbeing, developmental and behavioural outcomes, and healthy behaviours. A table on the website summarises the evidence (www.evidence-basedmedicine.com). Behavioural counselling. Several high quality systematic reviews and trials evaluated injury prevention. A modest benefit was seen … ER -