Evaluating Outcomes Used in Cardiothoracic Surgery Intervention Based Research - A Systematic Review of Reviews to Develop a Core Outcome Set

2015 ◽  
Vol 63 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Benstoem ◽  
A. Moza ◽  
A. Goetzenich ◽  
C. Stoppe ◽  
R. Autschbach
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Cardiothoracic Surgery ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Review Of Reviews

scholarly journals Evaluating Outcomes Used in Cardiothoracic Surgery Interventional Research: A Systematic Review of Reviews to Develop a Core Outcome Set

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. e0122204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carina Benstoem ◽  
Ajay Moza ◽  
Rüdiger Autschbach ◽  
Christian Stoppe ◽  
Andreas Goetzenich
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Cardiothoracic Surgery ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Review Of Reviews

scholarly journals The development of a faecal incontinence core outcome set: an international Delphi study protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 617-622
Author(s):  
Sadé Assmann ◽  
Daniel Keszthelyi ◽  
Jos Kleijnen ◽  
Merel Kimman ◽  
Foteini Anastasiou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Study Protocol ◽  
Faecal Incontinence ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Outcome Set

Abstract Purpose Faecal incontinence (FI) is estimated to affect around 7.7% of people. There is a lack of uniformity in outcome definitions, measurement and reporting in FI studies. Until now, there is no general consensus on which outcomes should be assessed and reported in FI research. This complicates comparison between studies and evidence synthesis, potentially leading to recommendations not evidence-based enough to guide physicians in selecting an FI therapy. A solution for this lack of uniformity in reporting of outcomes is the development of a Core Outcome Set (COS) for FI. This paper describes the protocol for the development of a European COS for FI. Methods Patient interviews and a systematic review of the literature will be performed to identify patient-, physician- and researcher-oriented outcomes. The outcomes will be categorised using the COMET taxonomy and put forward to a group of patients, physicians (i.e. colorectal surgeons, gastroenterologists and general practitioners) and researchers in a Delphi consensus exercise. This exercise will consist of up to three web-based rounds in which participants will prioritise and condense the list of outcomes, which is expected to result in consensus. A consensus meeting with participants from all stakeholder groups will take place to reach a final agreement on the COS. Discussion This study protocol describes the development of a European COS to improve reliability and consistency of outcome reporting in FI studies, thereby improving evidence synthesis and patient care. Trial registration This project has been registered in the COMET database on the 1st of April 2020, available at http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1554. The systematic review has been registered on the PROSPERO database on the 31st of August 2020, available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=202020&VersionID=1381336.

Systematic Review on Pain-Related Outcome Domains After Sternotomy: A First Step Toward the Development of a Core Outcome Set

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.V. Maeßen ◽  
E. Austenfeld ◽  
U. Kaiser ◽  
S. Bigalke ◽  
C.H. Meyer-Frießem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set

scholarly journals The Core Outcome DEvelopment for Carrier Screening (CODECS) study: protocol for development of a core outcome set

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ebony Richardson ◽  
Alison McEwen ◽  
Toby Newton-John ◽  
Karine Manera ◽  
Chris Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Carrier Screening ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
The Core ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Methods Of Measurement ◽  
Genetic Carrier Screening

Abstract Background Reproductive genetic carrier screening is a type of genetic testing available to those planning a pregnancy, or during their first trimester, to understand their risk of having a child with a severe genetic condition. There is a lack of consensus for ‘what to measure’ in studies on this intervention, leading to heterogeneity in choice of outcomes and methods of measurement. Such outcome heterogeneity has implications for the quality and comparability of these studies and has led to a lack of robust research evidence in the literature to inform policy and decision-making around the offer of this screening. As reproductive genetic carrier screening becomes increasingly accessible within the general population, it is timely to investigate the outcomes of this intervention. Objectives The development of a core outcome set is an established methodology to address issues with outcome heterogeneity in research. We aim to develop a core outcome set for reproductive genetic carrier screening to clarify and standardise outcomes for research and practice. Methods In accordance with guidance from the COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative, this study will consist of five steps: (i) a systematic review of quantitative studies, using narrative synthesis to identify previously reported outcomes, their definitions, and methods of measurement; (ii) a systematic review of qualitative studies using content analysis to identify excerpts related to patient experience and perspectives that can be interpreted as outcomes; (iii) semi-structured focus groups and interviews with patients who have undertaken reproductive genetic carrier screening to identify outcomes of importance to them; (iv) Delphi survey of key stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, and researchers, to refine and prioritise the list of outcomes generated from the previous steps; and (v) a virtual consensus meeting with a purposive sample of key stakeholders to finalise the core outcome set for reporting. Discussion This protocol outlines the core outcome set development process and its novel application in the setting of genetic testing. This core outcome set will support the standardisation of outcome reporting in reproductive carrier screening research and contribute to an evolving literature on outcomes to evaluate genetic testing and genetic counselling as health interventions. COMET core outcome set registration http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1381.

scholarly journals Diabetes after pregnancy prevention trials: Systematic review for core outcome set development

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharleen L. O'Reilly ◽  
Yvonne Leonard ◽  
Kaberi Dasgupta ◽  
Helle Terkildsen Maindal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Pregnancy Prevention ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Prevention Trials

scholarly journals Outcomes and outcomes measurements used in intervention studies of pelvic girdle pain and lumbopelvic pain: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Wuytack ◽  
Maggie O’Donovan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intervention Studies ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Pelvic Girdle ◽  
Pelvic Girdle Pain ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Pregnancy And Postpartum

Abstract Background Pelvic girdle pain is a common problem during pregnancy and postpartum with significant personal and societal impact and costs. Studies examining the effectiveness of interventions for pelvic girdle pain measure different outcomes, making it difficult to pool data in meta-analysis in a meaningful and interpretable way to increase the certainty of effect measures. A consensus-based core outcome set for pelvic girdle pain can address this issue. As a first step in developing a core outcome set, it is essential to systematically examine the outcomes measured in existing studies. Objective The objective of this systematic review was to identify, examine and compare what outcomes are measured and reported, and how outcomes are measured, in intervention studies and systematic reviews of interventions for pelvic girdle pain and for lumbopelvic pain (which includes pelvic girdle pain). Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, PEDro and Embase from inception to the 11th May 2018. Two reviewers independently selected studies by title/abstract and by full text screening. Disagreement was resolved through discussion. Outcomes reported and their outcome measurement instruments were extracted and recorded by two reviewers independently. We assessed the quality of reporting with two independent reviewers. The outcomes were grouped into core domains using the OMERACT filter 2.0 framework. Results A total of 107 studies were included, including 33 studies on pelvic girdle pain and 74 studies on lumbopelvic pain. Forty-six outcomes were reported across all studies, with the highest amount (26/46) in the ‘life impact’ domain. ‘Pain’ was the most commonly reported outcome in both pelvic girdle pain and lumbopelvic pain studies. Studies used different instruments to measure the same outcomes, particularly for the outcomes pain, function, disability and quality of life. Conclusions A wide variety of outcomes and outcome measurements are used in studies on pelvic girdle pain and lumbopelvic pain. The findings of this review will be included in a Delphi survey to reach consensus on a pelvic girdle pain - core outcome set. This core outcome set will allow for more effective comparison between future studies on pelvic girdle pain, allowing for more effective translation of findings to clinical practice.

scholarly journals Development of a core outcome set for myocardial infarction in clinical trials of traditional Chinese medicine: a study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e032256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruijin Qiu ◽  
Changming Zhong ◽  
Songjie Han ◽  
Tianmai He ◽  
Ya Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Chinese Medicine ◽  
Traditional Chinese Medicine ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Reporting ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Semistructured Interviews

IntroductionMyocardial infarction (MI) is the most dangerous complication in patients with coronary heart disease. In China, there is an increasing number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating MI. However, the inconsistency of outcome reporting means that a large number of clinical trials cannot be included in systematic reviews to provide the best evidence for clinical practice. The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set (COS) for future TCM clinical trials of MI, which may improve the consistency of outcome reporting and facilitate the synthesis of data across studies in systematic reviews.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of MI clinical trials with any intervention. Semistructured interviews will be conducted to obtain the perspectives of patients with MI. The outcomes from the systematic review and semistructured interviews will be grouped and used to develop a questionnaire. The questionnaire will be developed as a supplement for the TCM syndromes of MI and will be constructed from the results of a systematic review, existing medical records and a cross-sectional study. Then two rounds of the Delphi survey will be conducted with different stakeholders (TCM experts and Western medicine experts in cardiovascular disease, methodologists, magazine editors and patients) to determine the importance of the outcomes. Only the TCM experts will need to response to the questionnaire for core TCM syndromes. A face-to-face consensus meeting will be conducted to create a final COS and recommend measurement time for each outcome.Ethics and disseminationThis project has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine. The final COS will be published and freely available.Trial registration numberThis study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials database as study 1243 (available at:http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1243).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document