Core Outcomes and Common Data Elements in Chronic Subdural Hematoma: A Systematic Review of the Literature Focusing on Reported Outcomes.
ABSTRACT: The plethora of studies in chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) has not resulted in the development of an evidence-based treatment strategy, largely due to heterogeneous outcome measures that preclude cross-study comparisons and guideline development. This study aimed to identify and quantify the heterogeneity of outcome measures reported in the CSDH literature and to build a case for the development of a consensus-based core outcome set. This systematic review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and was registered with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42014007266). All full-text English language studies with >10 patients (prospective) or >100 patients (retrospective) published after 1990 examining clinical outcomes in CSDH were eligible for inclusion. One hundred two eligible studies were found. There were 14 (13.7%) randomized controlled trials, one single arm trial (1.0%), 25 (24.5%) cohort comparison studies, and 62 (60.8%) prospective or retrospective cohort studies. Outcome domains reported by the studies included mortality (63.8% of included studies), recurrence (94.1%), complications (48.0%), functional outcomes (40.2%), and radiological (38.2%) outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity in the definitions of the outcome measures, as evidenced by the seven different definitions of the term "recurrence," with no definition given in 19 studies. The time-points of assessment for all the outcome domains varied greatly from inpatient/hospital discharge to 18 months. This study establishes and quantifies the heterogeneity of outcome measure reporting in CSDH and builds the case for the development of a robust consensus-based core outcome set for future studies to adhere to as part of the Core Outcomes and Common Data Elements in CSDH (CODE-CSDH) project.
Project description:Background: Chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) is one of the most common neurosurgical diseases, while burr-hole drainage is the most frequently used surgical treatment. Strong evidence exists that subdural drain (SDD) placement reduces recurrence rates. However, the insertion of a subperiosteal drain (SPD) was shown to lead to similar recurrence rates and less complications than SDD. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic review of the literature and conduct a meta-analysis of studies comparing SPD with SDD after burr-hole drainage of cSDH.Methods: Pubmed and Embase databases were searched using a systematic search strategy to identify studies on drain location up to December 2019. Two independent researchers assessed the studies for inclusion and quality. Primary outcome measure was recurrence, while secondary outcome measures were drain misplacement, morbidity, mortality, and clinical outcome. Besides randomized controlled trials (RCT), we included non-randomized prospective cohort studies, as well as retrospective cohort studies. A fixed effects model was used if low heterogeneity (I2 < 50%) was present, otherwise a random effects model was used.Results: Following removal of duplicates, we screened 1109 articles of which 10 articles were included in our qualitative and quantitative analyses. One study was an RCT, three were non-randomized prospective cohort studies, and the remaining articles were retrospective cohort studies or subgroup analysis. In these 10 articles, 1,553 patients were treated with SPD and 1782 patients with SDD. Comparing the recurrence rate of cSDH a significant difference was found between SPD and SDD insertion (11.9 and 12.3%; RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.67–0.97, I2 = 0%, z = ?2.27, p = 0.02). SPD had significantly lower rates of drain misplacement and parenchymal injuries (1.2 and 7.8%; RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.07–0.42, I2 = 0%, z = ?3.4, p = 0.0001), as well as morbidity (6.4 and 8.2%; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.5–0.84, I2 = 44.5%, z = ?3.32, p =0.0009). Mortality rates (5.0 and 4.6%; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.6–1.14, I2 = 0%, z = ?1.2, p = 0.25) and favorable clinical outcome (89.6 and 88.9%; RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.89–1.24, I2 = 54.2%, t = 0.98, p = 0.40) were comparable in both groups.Conclusion: The insertion of SPD after burr-hole drainage of cSDH showed lower rates of recurrence, drain misplacements and parenchymal injuries, as well as overall morbidity, while clinical outcome and mortality were comparable to SDD. Therefore, the insertion of SPD after surgical drainage of cSDH should be encouraged.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies is associated with an increased risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity and represents a clinical dilemma. Interventions include expectant management with early preterm delivery if there are signs of fetal compromise, selective termination of the compromised twin, fetoscopic laser coagulation of the communicating placental vessels or termination of the whole pregnancy. Previous studies evaluating interventions have reported many different outcomes and outcome measures. Such variation makes comparing, contrasting, and combining results challenging, limiting ongoing research on this uncommon condition to inform clinical practice. We aim to produce, disseminate, and implement a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction research in monochorionic twin pregnancies. METHODS:An international steering group, including professionals, researchers, and lay experts, has been established to oversee the development of this core outcome set. The methods have been guided by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative Handbook. Potential core outcomes will be developed by undertaking a systematic review of studies evaluating interventions for selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies. Potential core outcomes will be entered into a three-round Delphi survey and key stakeholders including clinical professionals, researchers, and lay experts will be invited to participate. Repeated reflection and rescoring of individual outcomes should encourage group and individual stakeholder convergence towards consensus outcomes which will be entered into a modified Nominal Group Technique to finalize the core outcome set. Once core outcomes have been agreed, we will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for each outcome. DISCUSSION:The development, dissemination, and implementation of a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction should ensure that future research protocols select, collect, and report outcomes and outcome measures in a standardized manner. Data synthesis will be possible on a broad level and rigorous implementation should advance the quality of research studies and their effective use in order to guide clinical practice, improve patient care, maternal, short-term perinatal outcomes, and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) registration number: 998. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42018092697 . 18th April 2018.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Pregnancy and post partum are times of heightened risk for the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which in turn is one of the leading causes of maternal mortality and long-term morbidity. The current research aimed at improving health guidelines for women with pregnancy-associated VTE is limited by inconsistency in outcome reporting preventing comparison across studies, and lack of input from patients with respect to outcomes they propose are most important to measure. A suggested solution is the development of a core outcome set (COS) that defines the minimum criteria for outcome reporting in clinical trials and prospective studies. COSs function to facilitate data harmonisation and increase homogeneity in outcome reporting while incorporating the voice of women in this population in the planning of research to inform their ongoing care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The development of a COS for studies on pregnancy-associated VTE will comprise five steps. First, a systematic review of the published literature will identify currently reported outcomes, their definitions and measurements if applicable. This will be followed by in-person interviews with patients, clinicians, researchers, hospital administrators and policy-makers to identify outcomes they consider important. Third, the long list of outcomes obtained from steps I and II will be condensed through online Delphi surveys involving an international group of relevant stakeholders including patients. This will be followed by a face-to-face consensus meeting with representatives of all stakeholder groups to arrive at a consensus on the final COS. Lastly, to determine how the identified core outcomes should be measured, another literature review and Delphi process will be carried out as necessary. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study has been approved by the Mount Sinai Hospital Research Ethics Board (REB 18-0314-E). Study results will be published in open-access journals and presented at obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine and haematology conferences. All progress will be documented on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) and Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials databases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42019111479.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>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).<h4>Methods and findings</h4>We conducted a systematic review of reviews to determine both the type and number of outcomes reported in current cardiothoracic surgery interventional research, in order to identify a list of potential outcomes for a minimum core outcome set (COS). Special focus was placed on outcomes that emphasise salutogenesis. We interpreted salutogenic outcomes as those relating to optimum and/or positive health and well being. We searched Issue 7 (July 2014) of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Systematic reviews of randomised trials on non-minimal-invasive off- or on-pump cardiothoracic surgery (elective and emergency, excluding transplants) investigating pre-, intra- or postsurgical interventions related to the outcome of the procedure were eligible for inclusion. We excluded protocols and withdrawn systematic reviews. Two review authors extracted outcome data independently. Unique lists of salutogenically and non-salutogenically focused outcomes were established. 15 systematic reviews involving 371 randomized trials and 58,253 patients were included in this review. Applied definitions of single and composite endpoints varied significantly, and patient-centred, salutogenically focused outcomes were seldom reported. One third of included reviews did not assess patient-centred outcomes at all; all other reviews were unable to perform meta-analyses due to an absence of data or heterogeneity in outcome measures. This compares to 36 non-salutogenically focused outcome domains representing 121 individual non-salutogenically focused outcomes, whereof 50% were assessed only once. Measures of mortality, cerebrovascular complications and hospitalisation were reported most frequently. Two reviews chose a composite endpoint as primary outcome. Pooled analysis of composite endpoints was not possible, as the required data was not reported per patient in all components.<h4>Conclusion</h4>In cardiothoracic surgical trials, choice and definition of non-salutogenically focused single and composite outcomes are inconsistent. There is an absence of patient centred, salutogenically focused outcome parameters in cardiac trials. We recommend the development of a core outcome set of salutogenically focused and non-salutogenically focused outcomes for cardiothoracic surgical research.
Project description:In the United States (US), there are high levels of disengagement along the HIV care continuum. We sought to characterize the heterogeneity in research studies and interventions to improve care engagement among people living with diagnosed HIV infection. We performed a systematic literature search for interventions to improve HIV linkage to care, retention in care, reengagement in care and adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the US published from 2007-mid 2015. Study designs and outcomes were allowed to vary in included studies. We grouped interventions into categories, target populations, and whether results were significantly improved. We identified 152 studies, 7 (5%) linkage studies, 33 (22%) retention studies, 4 (3%) reengagement studies, and 117 (77%) adherence studies. 'Linkage' studies utilized 11 different outcome definitions, while 'retention' studies utilized 39, with very little consistency in effect measurements. The majority (59%) of studies reported significantly improved outcomes, but this proportion and corresponding effect sizes varied substantially across study categories. This review highlights a paucity of assessments of linkage and reengagement interventions; limited generalizability of results; and substantial heterogeneity in intervention types, outcome definitions, and effect measures. In order to make strides against the HIV epidemic in the US, care continuum research must be improved and benchmarked against an integrated, comprehensive framework.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Routine use of probiotics during antibiotic therapy in children remains a subject of discussion. To facilitate synthesis of individual study results and guideline formulation, it is important to assess predefined, similar, and clinically important outcomes. Core outcome sets are a proposed solution for this issue. The aim of this review was to document choice, design, and heterogeneity of outcomes in studies that assessed the effects of probiotics used for the prevention of antibiotic-associated adverse events in children. METHODS:A scoping literature search covering three major databases was performed. Studies that evaluated oral probiotics' use concomitant with antibiotic therapy in children were included. Data on outcome definitions, measurement instruments, and follow-up were extracted. The outcomes were assigned to predefined core areas and domains. Data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS:Thirty-seven studies were included in this review. Diarrhea, the most commonly reported outcome, had diagnostic criteria clearly defined only in 21 studies. In total, 16 different definitions of diarrhea were identified. Diarrhea duration, severity, and etiology were reported in 9, 4, and 7 studies, respectively. Twenty studies assessed gastrointestinal symptoms other than diarrhea. Seven studies reported outcomes related to resource use or the economic impact of the intervention. Only 2 studies assessed outcomes related to life impact. None of the studies predefined adverse events of probiotic use. CONCLUSIONS:Identified outcomes were characterized by substantial heterogeneity. The majority of outcomes were not designed to evaluate endpoints of real-life relevance. Results from this review suggest the need for a new core outcome set consisting of outcomes important for decision-making.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Maternal obesity is a risk factor for adverse maternal, fetal, and neonatal events. Numerous clinical trials are currently exploring the effectiveness of antenatal and peripartum interventions in improving pregnancy outcomes that can in future inform clinical practice. However, the heterogeneity in outcome reporting limits our ability to compare outcomes across studies, and there is a lack of stakeholder representation in outcome choice. A pragmatic solution to this problem is the development of a core outcome set (COS) that defines the minimum criteria for outcome reporting in clinical trials undertaken in this population, arrived at by the involvement of relevant stakeholders. METHODS:The development of a COS for studies on obesity in pregnant patients (COSSOPP) will comprise five steps. First, a systematic review of published literature will identify the long list of outcomes, their definitions and measurements if applicable, and outcome reporting quality. This will be followed by a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies with patients, and qualitative interviews in Toronto with patients, clinicians, researchers, hospital administrators, and policy-makers, to identify novel outcomes that were not obtained through systematic review. Third, the long list of outcomes will be narrowed down through online Delphi surveys involving an international group of patients and relevant stakeholders. This will be followed by a face-to-face consensus meeting with representatives of all stakeholder groups to arrive at a consensus on the final COS. Finally, in order to determine how the identified core outcomes should be measured, we will conduct another literature review and Delphi process. DISCUSSION:COSSOPP will engage patients, clinicians, researchers, and other relevant stakeholders in determining the core set of outcomes that should be reported and measured in order to harmonize outcome reporting in studies evaluating the effectiveness of antepartum and peripartum interventions in obese pregnant women. This protocol provides a detailed overview of the steps involved in the development of a COS, to guide researchers in developing COS within their areas of specialization. COMET CORE OUTCOME SET REGISTRATION: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/939 .
Project description:BACKGROUND:Valid and reliable outcome measures are needed to determine and compare treatment results of port wine stain (PWS) studies. Besides, uniformity in outcome measures is crucial to enable inter-study comparisons and meta-analyses. This study aimed to assess the heterogeneity in reported PWS outcome measures by mapping the (clinical) outcome measures currently used in prospective PWS studies. METHODS:OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for prospective PWS studies published from 2005 to May 2020. Interventional studies with a clinical efficacy assessment were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated methodological quality using a modified Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS:In total, 85 studies comprising 3,310 patients were included in which 94 clinician/observer-reported clinical efficacy assessments had been performed using 46 different scoring systems. Eighty-one- studies employed a global assessment of PWS appearance/improvement, of which -82% was expressed as percentage improvement and categorized in 26 different scoring systems. A wide variety of other global and multi-item scoring systems was identified. As a result of outcome heterogeneity and insufficient data reporting, only 44% of studies could be directly compared. A minority of studies included patient-reported or objective outcomes. Thirteen studies of good quality were found. CONCLUSION:Clinical PWS outcomes are highly heterogeneous, which hampers study comparisons and meta-analyses. Consensus-based development of a core outcome-set would benefit future research and clinical practice, especially considering the lack of high-quality trials.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Tuberculosis (TB) management can be challenging in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) not only because of its high burden but also the prolonged treatment period involving multiple drugs. With rapid development in mobile technology, mobile health (mHealth) interventions or using a mobile device for TB management has gained popularity. Despite the potential usefulness of mHealth interventions for TB, few studies have quantitatively synthesized evidence on its effectiveness, presumably because of variability in outcome measures reported in the literature. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the outcome measures reported in TB mHealth literature in LMICs. METHODS:MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched to identify mHealth intervention studies for TB (published up to May 2018) that reported any type of outcome measures. The extracted information included the study setting, types of mHealth technology used, target population, study design, and categories of outcome measures. Outcomes were classified into 13 categories including treatment outcome, adherence, process measure, perception, technical outcome, and so on. The qualitative synthesis of evidence focused on the categories of outcome measures reported by the type of mHealth interventions. RESULTS:A total of 27 studies were included for the qualitative synthesis of evidence. The study designs varied widely, ranging from randomized controlled trials to economic evaluations. A total of 12 studies adopted short message service (SMS), whereas 5 studies used SMS in combination with additional technologies or mobile apps. The study populations were also diverse, including patients with TB, patients with TB/HIV, health care workers, and general patients attending a clinic. There was a wide range of variations in the definition of outcome measures across the studies. Among the diverse categories of outcome measures, treatment outcomes have been reported in 14 studies, but only 6 of them measured the outcome according to the standard TB treatment definitions by the World Health Organization. CONCLUSIONS:This critical evaluation of outcomes reported in mHealth studies for TB management suggests that substantial variability exists in reporting outcome measures. To overcome the challenges in evidence synthesis for mHealth interventions, this study can provide insights into the development of a core set of outcome measures by intervention type and study design.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Limb fractures in children are common yet there are few trials that compare treatments for these injuries. There is significant heterogeneity in the outcomes reported in the paediatric orthopaedic literature, which limits the ability to compare study results and draw firm conclusions. The aim of the CORE-Kids Study is to develop a core outcome set for use in research studies of childhood limb fractures. A core outcome set will provide a minimum set of outcomes to be measured in all trials to minimise the heterogeneity of outcomes reported and minimise reporting bias. A core outcome set ensures that outcomes are reported that are relevant to families as well as clinicians. The core outcome set will include additional upper and lower limb modules. METHODS:The development of the core outcome set will require four phases to evaluate:What are the outcomes that are relevant to professionals?What are the outcomes that are relevant to families?What are the most important of these outcomes?Which outcomes should be included in the core outcome set?This will be completed through a systematic review of trials to identify the outcomes domains that are relevant to trialists. A series of semi-structured interviews will be completed with families to identify the outcome domains that are relevant to families. These outcome domains will be used in a three-round Delphi Study to analyse the importance of these outcome domains to a range of stakeholders including parents, clinicians and researchers. Following this, the core outcome set will be decided at a consensus meeting. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval has been awarded HRA/REC IRAS number 262503. Date of approval 06/08/2019. Dissemination will be through scientific literature and international societies. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative, registration number: 1274. Date of registration 13/12/2018. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018106605.