Evaluating outcomes used in cardiothoracic surgery interventional research: a systematic review of reviews to develop a core outcome set.

ABSTRACT:

Background

When planning clinical trials, it is a key element to choose appropriate outcomes that ensure the comparability of effects of interventions in ways that minimise bias. We hypothesise that outcome measures in cardiothoracic surgical trials are inconsistent and without standard. Therefore, comparing the relative effectiveness of interventions across studies is problematic. We surmise that cardiothoracic research has focused habitually on the identification of risk factors and on the reduction of adverse outcomes with less consideration of factors that contribute to well being and positive health outcomes (salutogenesis).

Methods and findings

We conducted a systematic review of reviews to determine both the type and number of outcomes reported in current cardiothorac

SUBMITTER: Benstoem C 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4382223 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature