scholarly journals Correction to: development of a core outcome set for amblyopia, strabismus and ocular motility disorders: a review to identify outcome measures

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Samia Al Jabri ◽  
Jamie Kirkham ◽  
Fiona J. Rowe
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Ocular Motility ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Motility Disorders ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Ocular Motility Disorders

scholarly journals Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for lateral elbow tendinopathy (COS-LET)

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Bateman ◽  
Jonathan P. Evans ◽  
Viana Vuvan ◽  
Val Jones ◽  
Adam C. Watts ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Outcome Evaluation ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Lateral Elbow ◽  
Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy

Abstract Background Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) is a common condition that can cause significant disability and associated socioeconomic cost. Although it has been widely researched, outcome measures are highly variable which restricts evidence synthesis across studies. In 2019, a working group of international experts, health care professionals and patients, in the field of tendinopathy (International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus (ICON) Group), published the results of a consensus exercise defining the nine core domains that should be measured in tendinopathy research. The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set (COS) for LET mapping to these core domains. The primary output will provide a template for future outcome evaluation of LET. In this protocol, we detail the methodological approach to the COS-LET development. Methods This study will employ a three-phase approach. (1) A systematic review of studies investigating LET will produce a comprehensive list of all instruments currently employed to quantify the treatment effect or outcome. (2) Instruments will be matched to the list of nine core tendinopathy outcome domains by a Steering Committee of clinicians and researchers with a specialist interest in LET resulting in a set of candidate instruments. (3) An international three-stage Delphi study will be conducted involving experienced clinicians, researchers and patients. Within this Delphi study, candidate instruments will be selected based upon screening using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) truth, feasibility and discrimination filters with a threshold of 70% agreement set for consensus. Conclusions There is currently no COS for the measurement or monitoring of LET in trials or clinical practice. The output from this project will be a minimum COS recommended for use in all future English language studies related to LET. The findings will be published in a high-quality journal and disseminated widely using professional networks, social media and via presentation at international conferences. Trial registration Registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database, November 2019. https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1497.

scholarly journals Development of a working core outcome set for cutaneous lupus erythematosus: a practical approach to an urgent unmet need

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e000529
Author(s):  
Lisa N Guo ◽  
Lourdes M Perez-Chada ◽  
Robert Borucki ◽  
Vinod E Nambudiri ◽  
Victoria P Werth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Activity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Global Assessment ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Cutaneous Lupus

ObjectiveThe lack of standardised outcomes and outcome measures for cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) represents a substantial barrier to clinical trial design, comparative analysis and approval of novel investigative treatments. We aimed to develop a working core outcome set (COS) for CLE randomised controlled trials and longitudinal observational studies.MethodsWe conducted a multistage literature review of CLE and SLE studies to generate candidate domains and outcome measures. Domains were narrowed to a working core domain set. Outcome measures for core domains were identified and examined.ResultsProposed core domains include skin-specific disease activity and damage, investigator global assessment (IGA) of disease activity, symptoms (encompassing itch, pain and photosensitivity), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity. Recommended physician-reported outcome measures include the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematous Disease Area and Severity Index (CLASI) and Cutaneous Lupus Activity IGA (CLA-IGA). For the domains of symptoms, HRQoL and PtGA of disease activity, we were unable to recommend one clearly superior instrument.ConclusionThis work represents a starting point for further refinement pending formal consensus activities and more rigorous evaluations of outcome measure quality. In the interim, the proposed working COS can serve as a much-needed guide for upcoming CLE clinical trials.

scholarly journals Outcomes reported on the management of COPD exacerbations: a systematic survey of randomised controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 00072-2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander G. Mathioudakis ◽  
Mia Moberg ◽  
Julie Janner ◽  
Pablo Alonso-Coello ◽  
Jørgen Vestbo
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Copd Exacerbations ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) report heterogeneous outcome measures, thus rendering their results incomparable, complicating their translation into clinical practice. As a first step in the development of a core outcome set that will aim to homogenise outcome measures in future RCTs, we assessed the outcomes reported in recent relevant RCTs and systematic reviews.We conducted a methodological systematic review (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ registration number CRD42016052437) of RCTs and systematic reviews on COPD exacerbation management indexed on Medline and PubMed during the last decade. We evaluated their methodology, specifically focusing on the reported outcome measures.Based on 123 RCTs and 38 systematic reviews, we found significant variability in the outcomes reported and in their definition. Mortality, which was assessed in 82% of the included trials, was the most frequently assessed outcome, followed by the rate of treatment success or failure (63%), adverse events (59%), health status, symptoms and quality of life (59%), lung function (47%), and duration of exacerbations (42%).The significant heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcome measures in RCTs and systematic reviews limits the interpretability and comparability of their results, and warrants the development of a core outcome set for COPD exacerbations management.

scholarly journals Development of a core outcome set to use in the research and assessment of malignant bowel obstruction: protocol for the RAMBO study

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e039154
Author(s):  
Elin Baddeley ◽  
Alison Bravington ◽  
Miriam Johnson ◽  
David C Currow ◽  
Fliss EM Murtagh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Bowel Obstruction ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Malignant Bowel Obstruction ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Ethical Approval

IntroductionStudies regarding the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) report conflicting findings. This is partly due to different outcome measures being used to evaluate severity of MBO and the response to treatments. Furthermore, current outcome measures focus mainly on measurable physiological parameters which may not correlate strongly with patient-defined quality of life. The development of core outcome sets allows a consistent approach to evaluating clinical conditions taking into consideration patient, healthcare professional and researcher viewpoints. It follows an internationally recognised standard methodology. We present a protocol for the development of a core outcome set for Research and Assessment of MBO (RAMBO).MethodsRAMBO is a multicentre study, comprising of four phases: a systematic review to examine current scope of outcome measures associated with MBO (phase I). Interviews with patients, companions and healthcare professionals will explore priorities and preferences for care and outcomes (phase II). An expert panel meeting will collate the findings into a set of outcomes (phase III), refined by consensus through a Delphi survey with key stakeholders (phase IV). The final set of outcomes will be ratified at a consensus meeting. Each step will actively include patient partners. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics will be used to analyse qualitative and quantitative data, respectively.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained (Wales REC 5, REF: 19/LO/1876). Study participants and relevant stakeholders will be updated with newsletters and a lay summary at the end of the study. Abstracts will be submitted to national and international conferences, result papers will be submitted to peer-reviewed, open access journals.Trial and PROSPERO registration numbersCore Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (1402); Systematic Literature Review (CRD42019150648); Rapid Review (CRD42020176393).

scholarly journals OMERACT Filter 2.1: Elaboration of the Conceptual Framework for Outcome Measurement in Health Intervention Studies

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1021-1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maarten Boers ◽  
Dorcas E. Beaton ◽  
Beverley J. Shea ◽  
Lara J. Maxwell ◽  
Susan J. Bartlett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Intervention Studies ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Core Set

Objective.The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0 framework was developed in 2014 to aid core outcome set development by describing the full universe of “measurable aspects of health conditions” from which core domains can be selected. This paper provides elaborations and updated concepts (OMERACT Filter 2.1).Methods.At OMERACT 2018, we discussed challenges in the framework application caused by unclear or ambiguous wording and terms and incompletely developed concepts.Results.The updated OMERACT Filter 2.1 framework makes benefits and harms explicit, clarifies concepts, and improves naming of various terms.Conclusion.We expect that the Filter 2.1 framework will improve the process of core set development.

scholarly journals Consensus Building in OMERACT: Recommendations for Use of the Delphi for Core Outcome Set Development

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1041-1046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Humphrey-Murto ◽  
Richard Crew ◽  
Beverley Shea ◽  
Susan J. Bartlett ◽  
Lyn March ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Delphi Process ◽  
Consensus Building ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Work In Progress ◽  
Outcome Set

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.

scholarly journals Outcomes in randomised controlled trials of multifocal lenses in cataract surgery: the case for development of a core outcome set

2020 ◽  
Vol 104 (10) ◽  
pp. 1345-1349
Author(s):  
Jennifer R Evans ◽  
Samantha R de Silva ◽  
Mohammed Ziaei ◽  
Varo Kirthi ◽  
Martin D Leyland
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background/aimsTo describe and summarise the outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials of multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery.MethodsWe identified all randomised controlled trials of multifocal versus monofocal lenses in a Cochrane review (last search date June 2016). We extracted and summarised data on all outcomes reported using the framework of domain, measurement, metric and method of aggregation.ResultsAll studies collected data on distance and near visual acuity but there was considerable variation in the measures used and whether these outcomes were unaided or best corrected. Most studies reported final value measurements, rather than change from baseline. Approximately half of the studies reported data as a continuous measure only, one-third reported both continuous and categorical measures and a minority reported categorical measures only. There was little consensus as to cut-points. Although a majority of studies included one or more patient-reported outcome measures, none of the studies reported patient involvement in the choice of outcomes.ConclusionThe collection and analysis of data on outcome measures in studies of multifocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery are complicated. As a result, there is considerable heterogeneity in collection and reporting in the medical literature. This makes it difficult to synthesise such data to provide robust estimates of effect and is a potential source of research waste. Investigators in this field must produce a core outcome set that is informed by patients’ views and we propose an initial set of outcomes on which these could be based.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document