Jmn Duffy1, R Rolph2, C Gale3, M Hirsch4, K S Khan4, S Ziebland1, R J McManus1. 1. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Kings College London, London, UK. 3. Neonatal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK. 4. Women's Health Research Unit, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. OBJECTIVE: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. SEARCH STRATEGY: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. RESULTS: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48%) or 2016 (n = 16; 32%). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16%) and newborn health (n = 3; 6%) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52%) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1%), national (n = 18; 38%), and regional (n = 4; 8%) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50% funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.
BACKGROUND: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. OBJECTIVE: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. SEARCH STRATEGY: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. RESULTS: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48%) or 2016 (n = 16; 32%). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16%) and newborn health (n = 3; 6%) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52%) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1%), national (n = 18; 38%), and regional (n = 4; 8%) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50% funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.
Authors: Hsin-Fang Chung; Nirmala Pandeya; Annette J Dobson; Diana Kuh; Eric J Brunner; Sybil L Crawford; Nancy E Avis; Ellen B Gold; Ellen S Mitchell; Nancy F Woods; Joyce T Bromberger; Rebecca C Thurston; Hadine Joffe; Toyoko Yoshizawa; Debra Anderson; Gita D Mishra Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2018-02-12 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: James William Harrison Webbe; James M N Duffy; Elsa Afonso; Iyad Al-Muzaffar; Ginny Brunton; Anne Greenough; Nigel J Hall; Marian Knight; Jos M Latour; Caroline Lee-Davey; Neil Marlow; Laura Noakes; Julie Nycyk; Angela Richard-Löndt; Ben Wills-Eve; Neena Modi; Chris Gale Journal: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 5.747
Authors: Simen Vergote; Felix De Bie; Jan Bosteels; Holly Hedrick; James Duffy; Beverley Power; Alexandra Benachi; Paolo De Coppi; Caraciolo Fernandes; Kevin Lally; Irwin Reiss; Jan Deprest Journal: Trials Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 2.279