scholarly journals Assessing Treatment Success or Failure as an Outcome in Randomised Clinical Trials of COPD Exacerbations. A Meta-Epidemiological Study

Biomedicines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 1837
Author(s):  
Alexander G. Mathioudakis ◽  
Sachin Ananth ◽  
Thomas Bradbury ◽  
Balazs Csoma ◽  
Pradeesh Sivapalan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Copd Exacerbations ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Systemic Treatments ◽  
Methodological Studies

A recently published ERS core outcome set recommends that all trials of COPD exacerbation management should assess the treatment success (or “cure” of the exacerbation), defined as a dichotomous measure of the overall outcome of an exacerbation. This methodological systematic review describes and compares the instruments that were used to assess treatment success or failure in 54 such RCTs, published between 2006–2020. Twenty-three RCTs used composite measures consisting of several undesirable outcomes of an exacerbation, together defining an overall unfavourable outcome, to define treatment failure. Thirty-four RCTs used descriptive instruments that used qualitative or semi-quantitative descriptions to define cure, marked improvement, improvement of the exacerbation, or treatment failure. Treatment success and failure rates among patients receiving guidelines-directed treatments at different settings and timepoints are described and could be used to inform power calculations in future trials. Descriptive instruments appeared more sensitive to treatment effects compared to composite instruments. Further methodological studies are needed to optimise the evaluation of treatment success/failure. In the meantime, based on the findings of this systematic review, the ERS core outcome set recommends that cure should be defined as sufficient improvement of the signs and symptoms of the exacerbation such that no additional systemic treatments are required.

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 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 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document