scholarly journals A core outcome set for future endometriosis research: an international consensus development study

2020 ◽  
Vol 127 (8) ◽  
pp. 967-974 ◽  
Author(s):  
JMN Duffy ◽  
M Hirsch ◽  
M Vercoe ◽  
J Abbott ◽  
C Barker ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 127 (12) ◽  
pp. 1516-1526 ◽  
Author(s):  
JMN Duffy ◽  
AE Cairns ◽  
D Richards‐Doran ◽  
J 't Hooft ◽  
C Gale ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. 191-200
Author(s):  
J.M.N. Duffy ◽  
H. AlAhwany ◽  
S. Bhattacharya ◽  
B. Collura ◽  
C. Curtis ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 208-217
Author(s):  
James M.N. Duffy ◽  
Alexandra E. Cairns ◽  
Laura A. Magee ◽  
Peter von Dadelszen ◽  
Janneke van 't Hooft ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 2735-2745 ◽  
Author(s):  
J M N Duffy ◽  
S Bhattacharya ◽  
S Bhattacharya ◽  
M Bofill ◽  
B Collura ◽  
...  

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Can consensus definitions for the core outcome set for infertility be identified in order to recommend a standardized approach to reporting? SUMMARY ANSWER Consensus definitions for individual core outcomes, contextual statements and a standardized reporting table have been developed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Different definitions exist for individual core outcomes for infertility. This variation increases the opportunities for researchers to engage with selective outcome reporting, which undermines secondary research and compromises clinical practice guideline development. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Potential definitions were identified by a systematic review of definition development initiatives and clinical practice guidelines and by reviewing Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. These definitions were discussed in a face-to-face consensus development meeting, which agreed consensus definitions. A standardized approach to reporting was also developed as part of the process. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus development methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Forty-four potential definitions were inventoried across four definition development initiatives, including the Harbin Consensus Conference Workshop Group and International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 12 clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. Twenty-seven participants, from 11 countries, contributed to the consensus development meeting. Consensus definitions were successfully developed for all core outcomes. Specific recommendations were made to improve reporting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations. There was limited representation from low- and middle-income countries. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS A minimum data set should assist researchers in populating protocols, case report forms and other data collection tools. The generic reporting table should provide clear guidance to researchers and improve the reporting of their results within journal publications and conference presentations. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement, and over 80 specialty journals have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and a financial interest in NexHand. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. J.W. reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. A.V. reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their ‘traffic light’ system for infertility treatment ‘add-ons’. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.


2020 ◽  
Vol 127 (8) ◽  
pp. 983-992 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAW Jansen ◽  
MH Koot ◽  
J van‘t Hooft ◽  
CR Dean ◽  
JMN Duffy ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1041-1046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Humphrey-Murto ◽  
Richard Crew ◽  
Beverley Shea ◽  
Susan J. Bartlett ◽  
Lyn March ◽  
...  

Objective.Developing international consensus on outcome measures for clinical trials is challenging. The following paper will review consensus building in Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), with a focus on the Delphi.Methods.Based on the literature and feedback from delegates at OMERACT 2018, a set of recommendations is provided in the form of the OMERACT Delphi Consensus Checklist.Results.The OMERACT delegates generally supported the use of the checklist as a guide. The checklist provides guidance for clearly outlining the multiple aspects of the Delphi process.Conclusion.OMERACT is deeply committed to consensus building and these recommendations should be considered a work in progress.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan R. Boehnke ◽  
Rusham Zahra Rana ◽  
Jamie J. Kirkham ◽  
Louise Rose ◽  
Gina Agarwal ◽  
...  

Introduction 'Multimorbidity' describes the presence of two or more long-term conditions, which can include communicable and non-communicable diseases, and mental disorders. The rising global burden from multimorbidity is well-documented, but trial evidence for effective interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. Selection of appropriate outcomes is fundamental to trial design to ensure cross-study comparability, but there is currently no agreement on a core outcome set (COS) to include in trials investigating multimorbidity specifically in LMIC. Our aim is to develop international consensus on two COS for trials of interventions to prevent and treat multimorbidity in LMIC settings. Methods and Analysis Following methods recommended by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET initiative), the development of these two COS will occur in three stages: (1) generation of a long list of potential outcomes for inclusion; (2) two-round online Delphi surveys; and (3) consensus meetings. First, to generate an initial list of outcomes, we will conduct a systematic review of multimorbidity intervention and prevention trials and interviews with people living with multimorbidity and their caregivers in LMICs. Outcomes will be classified using an outcome taxonomy. Two-round Delphi surveys will be used to elicit importance scores for these outcomes from people living with multimorbidity, caregivers, healthcare professionals, policy makers, and researchers in LMICs. Finally, consensus meetings will be held to discuss the Delphi survey results and agree outcomes for inclusion in the two COS. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the Research Governance Committee of the Department of Health Sciences, University of York, UK [HSRGC/2020/409/D:COSMOS]. Each participating country/research group will obtain local ethics board approval. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. We will disseminate findings through peer-reviewed open access publications, and presentations at global conferences selected to reach a wide range of LMIC stakeholders.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Bendtsen ◽  
Claire Garnett ◽  
Paul Toner ◽  
Gillian W Shorter

BACKGROUND A core outcome set (COS) for trials and evaluations of the effectiveness and efficacy of alcohol brief interventions (ABIs) has recently been established through international consensus to address the variability of outcomes evaluated. OBJECTIVE This is a protocol for studies to assess if there are order effects among the questions included in the COS. METHODS The 10 items of the COS are organized into 4 clusters. A factorial design will be used with 24 arms, where each arm represents 1 order of the 4 clusters. Individuals searching online for help will be asked to complete a questionnaire, and consenting participants will be randomized to 1 of the 24 arms (double-blind with equal allocation). Participants will be included if they are 18 years or older. The primary analyses will (1) estimate how the order of the clusters of outcomes affects how participants respond and (2) investigate patterns of abandonment of the questionnaire. RESULTS Data collection is expected to commence in November 2020. A Bayesian group sequential design will be used with interim analyses planned for every 50 participants completing the questionnaire. Data collection will end no more than 24 months after commencement, and the results are expected to be published no later than December 2023. CONCLUSIONS Homogenizing the outcomes evaluated in studies of ABIs is important to support synthesis, and the COS is an important step toward this goal. Determining whether there may be issues with the COS question order may improve confidence in using it and speed up its dissemination in the research community. We encourage others to adopt the protocol as a study within their trial as they adopt the ORBITAL (Outcome Reporting in Brief Intervention Trials: Alcohol) COS to build a worldwide repository and provide materials to support such analysis. CLINICALTRIAL ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN17954645; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17954645 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT PRR1-10.2196/24175


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document