Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study† ‡.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Duffy JMN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7744160 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study† ‡.
Duffy J M N JMN AlAhwany H H Bhattacharya S S Collura B B Curtis C C Evers J L H JLH Farquharson R G RG Franik S S Giudice L C LC Khalaf Y Y Knijnenburg J M L JML Leeners B B Legro R S RS Lensen S S Vazquez-Niebla J C JC Mavrelos D D Mol B W J BWJ Niederberger C C Ng E H Y EHY Otter A S AS Puscasiu L L Rautakallio-Hokkanen S S Repping S S Sarris I I Simpson J L JL Strandell A A Strawbridge C C Torrance H L HL Vail A A van Wely M M Vercoe M A MA Vuong N L NL Wang A Y AY Wang R R Wilkinson J J Youssef M A MA Farquhar C M CM
Human reproduction (Oxford, England) 20201201 12
<h4>Study question</h4>Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed?<h4>Summary answer</h4>A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility.<h4>What is known already</h4>Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting o ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7744157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop a core outcome set for international burn research.DesignDevelopment and international consensus, from April 2017 to November 2019.MethodsCandidate outcomes were identified from systematic reviews and stakeholder interviews. Through a Delphi survey, international clinicians, researchers, and UK patients prioritised outcomes. Anonymised feedback aimed to achieve consensus. Pre-defined criteria for retaining outcomes were agreed. A consensus meeting with voting was held to finalise the core outcome set.ResultsData source examination identified 1021 unique outcomes grouped into 88 candidate outcomes. Stakeholders in round 1 of the survey, included 668 health professionals from 77 countries (18% from low or low middle income countries) and 126 UK patients or carers. After round 1, one outcome was discarded, and 13 new outcomes added. After round 2, 69 items were discarded, leaving 31 outcomes for the consensus meeting. Outcome merging and voting, in two rounds, with prespecified thresholds agreed seven core outcomes: death, specified complications, ability to do daily tasks, wound healing, neuropathic pain and itch, psychological wellbeing, and return to school or work.ConclusionsThis core outcome set caters for global burn research, and future trials are recommended to include measures of these outcomes.
| S-EPMC9978679 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7744161 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance is both a global public health and patient safety problem driven by overprescribing of antibiotic and other antimicrobial drugs. To conserve the effectiveness of antibiotics for future generations, antibiotic stewardship approaches to using them only where appropriate and necessary are advocated. Dentistry accounts for about 10% of antibiotic prescriptions across global healthcare, with 80% not in accordance with guidance in some countries. Core outcome sets enable the results of studies to be compared in order to maximise the value which can be derived from them. The aim of this study is to develop an international consensus on a core outcome set for dental antibiotic stewardship.MethodsConsensus on outcomes which are critical for inclusion in the core outcome set for dental antibiotic stewardship will be sought through two rounds of a Delphi survey (using the DelphiManager online system) followed by a final online consensus meeting. Thirty participants will be recruited to the Delphi Panel from across three stakeholder groups: ten dentists, ten academics and ten adults experienced with dental antibiotics as either a patient or parent/carer of a patient who has been prescribed them. Consensus will be achieved if more than 70% of the panel agree that an outcome is critical, with at least one from each stakeholder group in agreement. A long-list of candidate core outcomes has been developed from previously published studies with additions recommended by the steering group. The steering group will oversee development of the core outcome set and includes people from around the world with experience of dental antibiotics: clinicians, researchers and people with experience of being prescribed dental antibiotics and/or surviving an antibiotic resistant infection.DiscussionTo date, few studies of dental antibiotic stewardship have been published. Internationally, dental antibiotic guidelines and patterns of use vary widely, so a core outcome set is particularly important to facilitate meaningful comparisons between studies. This core outcome set will encompass antibiotic prescribing for both therapeutic indications, such as for people with acute infections, and for prophylactic indications, such as the prevention of distant site infections (like infective endocarditis) following dental procedures.
| S-EPMC8817512 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11793099 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is an emergency condition that requires acute intervention and can lead to permanent neurological deficit in working age adults. A Core Outcome Set (COS) is the minimum set of outcomes that should be reported by a research study within a specific disease area. There is significant heterogeneity in outcome reporting for CES, which does not allow data synthesis between studies. The hypothesis is that a COS for CES can be developed for future research studies using patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) as key stakeholders. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Qualitative semi-structured interviews with CES patients were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using NVivo to identify the outcomes of importance. These were combined with the outcomes obtained from a published systematic literature review of CES patients. The outcomes were grouped into a list of 37, for rating through two rounds of an international Delphi survey according to pre-set criteria. The Delphi survey had an overall response rate of 63% and included 172 participants (104 patients, 68 HCPs) from 14 countries who completed both rounds. Thirteen outcomes reached consensus at the end of the Delphi survey and there was no attrition bias detected. The results were discussed at an international consensus meeting attended by 34 key stakeholders (16 patients and 18 HCPs) from 8 countries. A further three outcomes were agreed to be included. There was no selection bias detected at the consensus meeting. There are 16 outcomes in total in the CESCOS. DISCUSSION:This is the first study in the literature that has determined the core outcomes in CES using a transparent international consensus process involving healthcare professionals and CES patients as key stakeholders. This COS is recommended as the most important outcomes to be reported in any research study investigating CES outcomes and will allow evidence synthesis in CES.
| S-EPMC6953762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background300 million operations and procedures are performed annually across the world, all of which require a patient's informed consent. No standardised measure of the consent process exists in current clinical practice. We aimed to define a core outcome set for informed consent for therapy.MethodsThe core outcome set was developed in accordance with a predefined research protocol and the Core OutcoMes in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) methodology comprising systematic review, qualitative semi structured interviews, a modified Delphi process and consensus webinars to ratify outcomes for inclusion in the final core outcome set. (Registration- https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1024 ). Participants from all key stakeholder groups took part in the process, including patients and the public, healthcare practitioners and consent researchers.Results36 outcome domains were synthesised through systematic review and organised into a consent taxonomy. 41 semi-structured interviews were performed with all consent stakeholders groups. 164 participants from all stakeholder groups across 8 countries completed Delphi Round 1 and 125 completed Round 2. 11 outcomes met the 'consensus in' criteria. 6 met 'consensus in' all stakeholder groups and were included directly in the final core outcome set. 5 remaining outcomes meeting 'consensus in' were ratified over two consensus webinars. 9 core outcomes were included in the final core outcome set: Satisfaction with the quality and amount of information, Patient feeling that there was a choice, Patient feeling that the decision to consent was their own, Confidence in the decision made, Satisfaction with communication, Trust in the clinician, Patient satisfaction with the consent process, Patient rated adequacy of time and opportunity to ask questions.ConclusionThis international mixed-methods qualitative study is the first of its kind to define a core outcome set for informed consent for intervention. It defines what outcomes are of importance to key stakeholders in the consent process and is a forward step towards standardising future consent research.
| S-EPMC9364552 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo reach an international expert consensus on the diagnosis, prognosis and management of fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (LUTO) by means of a Delphi procedure, and to use this to define a core outcome set (COS).MethodsA three-round Delphi procedure was conducted among an international panel of experts in fetal LUTO. The panel was provided with a list of literature-based parameters to consider for the diagnosis, prognosis, management and outcomes of LUTO. A parallel procedure was conducted with patient groups during the development of the COS.ResultsA total of 168 experts were approached, of whom 99 completed the first round and 80/99 (80.8%) completed all three rounds of the study questionnaires. Consensus was reached that, in the first trimester, an objective measurement of longitudinal bladder diameter of ≥ 7 mm should be used to suspect LUTO. In the second trimester, imaging parameters suggestive of LUTO could include enlarged bladder, keyhole sign, bladder wall thickening, bilateral hydronephrosis, bilateral hydroureteronephrosis and male sex. There was 79% agreement that the current prognostic scoring systems in the literature should not be used clinically. However, experts agreed on the value of amniotic fluid volume (at < 24 weeks) to predict survival and that the value of fetal intervention is to improve the chance of neonatal survival. Experts endorsed sonographic parameters suggestive of renal dysplasia, at least one vesicocentesis, and renal biochemistry for prognosis and counseling, but these items did not reach a consensus for determining candidacy for fetal intervention. On the other hand, imaging parameters suggestive of LUTO, absence of life-limiting structural or genetic anomalies, gestational age of ≥ 16 weeks and oligohydramnios (defined as deepest vertical pocket < 2 cm) should be used as candidacy criteria for fetal intervention based on expert consensus. If bladder refill was evaluated, it should be assessed subjectively. Vesicoamniotic shunt should be the first line of fetal intervention. In the presence of suspected fetal renal failure, serial amnioinfusion should be offered only as an experimental procedure under research protocols. A COS for future LUTO studies was agreed upon.ConclusionInternational consensus on the diagnosis, prognosis and management of fetal LUTO, as well as the COS, should inform clinical care and research to optimize perinatal outcomes. © 2024 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
| S-EPMC11579430 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEvidence for the management of acute otitis externa (AOE) is limited, with unclear diagnostic criteria and variably reported outcome measures that may not reflect key stakeholder priorities. We aimed to develop 1) a definition, 2) diagnostic criteria and 3) a core outcome set (COS) for AOE.Study designCOS development according to Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) methodology and parallel consensus selection of diagnostic criteria/definition.SettingStakeholders from the United Kingdom.Subjects and methodsComprehensive literature review identified candidate items for the COS, definition and diagnostic criteria. Nine individuals with past AOE generated further patient-centred candidate items. Candidate items were rated for importance by patient and professional (ENT doctors, general practitioners, microbiologists, nurses, audiologists) stakeholders in a three-round online Delphi exercise. Consensus items were grouped to form the COS, diagnostic criteria, and definition.ResultsCandidate COS items from patients (n = 28) and literature (n = 25) were deduplicated and amalgamated to a final candidate list (n = 46). Patients emphasised quality-of-life and the impact on daily activities/work. Via the Delphi process, stakeholders agreed on 31 candidate items. The final COS covered six outcomes: pain; disease severity; impact on quality-of-life and daily activities; patient satisfaction; treatment-related outcome; and microbiology. 14 candidate diagnostic criteria were identified, 8 reaching inclusion consensus. The final definition for AOE was 'diffuse inflammation of the ear canal skin of less than 6 weeks duration'.ConclusionThe development and adoption of a consensus definition, diagnostic criteria and a COS will help to standardise future research in AOE, facilitating meta-analysis. Consulting former patients throughout development highlighted deficiencies in the outcomes adopted previously, in particular concerning the impact of AOE on daily life.
| S-EPMC8121300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a progressive chronic spinal cord injury estimated to affect 1 in 50 adults. Without standardised guidance, clinical research studies have selected outcomes at their discretion, often underrepresenting the disease and limiting comparability between studies. Utilising a standard minimum data set formed via multi-stakeholder consensus can address these issues. This combines processes to define a core outcome set (COS)-a list of key outcomes-and core data elements (CDEs), a list of key sampling characteristics required to interpret the outcomes. Further "how" these outcomes should be measured and/or reported is then defined in a core measurement set (CMS). This can include a recommendation of a standardised time point at which outcome data should be reported. This study defines a COS, CDE, and CMS for DCM research.Methods and findingsA minimum data set was developed using a series of modified Delphi processes. Phase 1 involved the setup of an international DCM stakeholder group. Phase 2 involved the development of a longlist of outcomes, data elements, and formation into domains. Phase 3 prioritised the outcomes and CDEs using a two-stage Delphi process. Phase 4 determined the final DCM minimal data set using a consensus meeting. Using the COS, Phase 5 finalised definitions of the measurement construct for each outcome. In Phase 6, a systematic review of the literature was performed, to scope and define the psychometric properties of measurement tools. Phase 7 used a modified Delphi process to inform the short-listing of candidate measurement tools. The final measurement set was then formed through a consensus meeting (Phase 8). To support implementation, the data set was then integrated into template clinical research forms (CRFs) for use in future clinical trials (Phase 9). In total, 28 outcomes and 6 domains (Pain, Neurological Function, Life Impact, Radiology, Economic Impact, and Adverse Events) were entered into the final COS. Thirty two outcomes and 4 domains (Individual, Disease, Investigation, and Intervention) were entered into the final CDE. Finally, 4 outcome instruments (mJOA, NDI, SF-36v2, and SAVES2) were identified for the CMS, with a recommendation for trials evaluating outcomes after surgery, to include baseline measurement and at 6 months from surgery.ConclusionsThe AO Spine RECODE-DCM has produced a minimum data set for use in DCM clinical trials today. These are available at https://myelopathy.org/minimum-dataset/. While it is anticipated the CDE and COS have strong and durable relevance, it is acknowledged that new measurement tools, alongside an increasing transition to study patients not undergoing surgery, may necessitate updates and adaptation, particularly with respect to the CMS.
| S-EPMC11379399 | biostudies-literature