A systematic review of studies reporting the development of core outcome sets for use in routine care

被引:10
|
作者
Kearney, Anna [1 ,4 ]
Gargon, Elizabeth [1 ]
Mitchell, James W. [2 ]
Callaghan, Stephen [3 ]
Yameen, Farheen [3 ]
Williamson, Paula R. [1 ]
Dodd, Susanna [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Liverpool, Dept Hlth Data Sci, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
[2] Univ Liverpool, Inst Syst Mol & Integrat Biol, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
[3] Univ Liverpool, NIHR, ARC, NWC, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
[4] Univ Liverpool, Hlth Data Sci, Block F Waterhouse Bldg,1-5 Brownlow St, Liverpool L69 3GL, Lancashire, England
关键词
Core outcome sets; Routine care; Healthcare evaluation; Health outcomes; COMET; Clinical audit; Value -based healthcare; Patient; -centered; outcome measures; CLINICAL-TRIALS; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.03.011
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: Core outcome sets (COS) represent the minimum health outcomes to be measured for a given health condition. Interest is growing in using COS within routine care to support delivery of patient-focused care. This review aims to systematically map COS developed for routine care to understand their scope, stakeholder involvement, and development methods.Methods: Medline (Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science Core collection were searched for studies reporting development of COS for routine care. Data on scope, methods, and stakeholder groups were analyzed in subgroups defined by setting.Results: Screening 25,301 records identified 262 COS: 164 for routine care only and 98 for routine care and research. Nearly half of the COS (112/254, 44%) were developed with patients, alongside input from experts in registries, insurance, legal, outcomes measurement, and performance management. Research publications were often searched to generate an initial list of outcomes (115/198, 58%) with few searching routine health records (47/198, 24%).Conclusion: An increasing number of COS is being developed for routine care. Although involvement of patient stakeholders has increased in recent years, further improvements are needed. Methodology and scope are broadly similar to COS for research but implementation of the final set is a greater consideration during development.(c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:34 / 43
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A systematic review of outcome and outcome-measure reporting in randomised trials evaluating surgical interventions for anterior-compartment vaginal prolapse: a call to action to develop a core outcome set
    Durnea, Constantin M.
    Pergialiotis, Vasilios
    Duffy, James M. N.
    Bergstrom, Lina
    Elfituri, Abdullatif
    Doumouchtsis, Stergios K.
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2018, 29 (12) : 1727 - 1745
  • [42] A systematic review of outcome and outcome-measure reporting in randomised trials evaluating surgical interventions for anterior-compartment vaginal prolapse: a call to action to develop a core outcome set
    Constantin M. Durnea
    Vasilios Pergialiotis
    James M. N. Duffy
    Lina Bergstrom
    Abdullatif Elfituri
    Stergios K. Doumouchtsis
    International Urogynecology Journal, 2018, 29 : 1727 - 1745
  • [43] Heterogeneity of surrogate outcome measures used in critical care studies: A systematic review
    Verghis, Rejina
    Blackwood, Bronagh
    McDowell, Cliona
    Toner, Philip
    Hadfield, Daniel
    Gordon, Anthony C.
    Clarke, Mike
    McAuley, Daniel
    CLINICAL TRIALS, 2023, 20 (03) : 307 - 318
  • [44] The participatory development of a national core set of person-centred diabetes outcome constructs for use in routine diabetes care across healthcare sectors
    Skovlund S.E.
    Troelsen L.H.
    Klim L.
    Jakobsen P.E.
    Ejskjaer N.
    Research Involvement and Engagement, 7 (1)
  • [45] Outcome reporting in bariatric surgery: an in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set, the BARIACT Study
    Hopkins, J. C.
    Howes, N.
    Chalmers, K.
    Savovic, J.
    Whale, K.
    Coulman, K. D.
    Welbourn, R.
    Whistance, R. N.
    Andrews, R. C.
    Byrne, J. P.
    Mahon, D.
    Blazeby, J. M.
    OBESITY REVIEWS, 2015, 16 (01) : 88 - 106
  • [46] Systematic review for the development of a core outcome set for monofocal intraocular lenses for cataract surgery
    Tarricone, Rosanna
    Rognoni, Carla
    Ciarlo, Anita
    Giabbani, Ilaria
    Novello, Leonardo
    Balestrieri, Marco
    Costa, Giacomo
    Favuzza, Eleonora
    Mencucci, Rita
    Taroni, Leonardo
    Tognetto, Daniele
    Giglio, Rosa
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2024, 11
  • [47] Reporting Outcomes and Outcome Measures in Digital Replantation: A Systematic Review
    Moltaji, Syena
    Gallo, Matteo
    Wong, Chloe
    Murphy, Jessica
    Gallo, Lucas
    Waltho, Daniel
    Copeland, Andrea
    Karpinski, Marta
    Mowakket, Sadek
    Duku, Eric
    Thoma, Achilleas
    JOURNAL OF HAND AND MICROSURGERY, 2020, 12 (02) : 85 - 94
  • [48] Inconsistent outcome reporting in large neonatal trials: a systematic review
    Webbe, James William Harrison
    Ali, Shohaib
    Sakonidou, Susanna
    Webbe, Thomas
    Duffy, James M. N.
    Brunton, Ginny
    Modi, Neena
    Gale, Chris
    ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD-FETAL AND NEONATAL EDITION, 2020, 105 (01): : F69 - F75
  • [49] Core Outcome Sets for Clinical Trials and Observational Studies in Vulvovaginal Disease
    Foster, David C.
    Stockdale, Colleen K.
    Simpson, Rosalind
    Kirtschig, Gudula
    JOURNAL OF LOWER GENITAL TRACT DISEASE, 2017, 21 (03) : 163 - 165
  • [50] The Use of Person-Centered Outcome Measures to Support Integrated Palliative Care for Older People: A Systematic Review
    Chen, Linghui
    Sleeman, Katherine E.
    Bradshaw, Andy
    Sakharang, Wilailak
    Mo, Yihan
    Ellis-Smith, Clare
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION, 2024, 25 (08)