Tools
ToolsTay, Joel, Robinson, Catherine, Blazeby, Jane, Loke, Yoon, Lowery, Aoife, Alkhaffaf, Bilal and Kirkham, Jamie J. (2024) Inclusion of harm outcomes in Core Outcome Sets requires careful consideration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 174. ISSN 0895-4356
Preview |
PDF (Tay_etal_2024_JClinicalEpidemiology)
- Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (572kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of all published core outcome set (COS) studies that include an adverse event or harm outcome, to determine the proportion of individual vs pooled harms, and to investigate characteristics that influence their inclusion. Methods: We examined the extent to which a sample of 100 published COS studies (from January 2021 to January 2023) include both pooled and individual harms in the final COS. One investigator extracted the information from the COS studies, which was cross-checked against previous COS investigational research, and where possible verified with COS authors or a pharmacologist. Using Qualtrics™, we conducted a personalized online survey of developers of the 100 COS to ask them about the importance, their experiences, and methodological approaches for dealing with harms within their COS development studies. Results: One hundred COS were identified from 91 separate COS studies, the majority of which considered most of the minimum standards for development. Two-thirds (65%) of the COS included at least 1 harm outcome. In total, 1104 core outcomes were identified across the 100 COS, of which 184 (17%) were harm outcomes (154 individual vs 56 pooled). Individual harms were more likely to be included in a final COS if they were developed for single treatment interventions (50%) compared to those being developed for multitreatment modalities (39%). Some COS developers adopted outcome frameworks as part of their COS development process to facilitate the inclusion of harm outcomes in their final COS. A third (33%) of respondents felt that harm outcomes should be included in all COS but over half (56%) thought this would be dependent on some aspect of the scope of the COS and improved methodology and awareness of how to deal with harm outcomes in the COS development process. Conclusion: Harm outcomes are already included in many COS either as individual or pooled harms. It is evident that there are some challenges with regards to both the methodology and necessity to include harms within a COS (pooled or individual. COS developers should carefully consider the need to include important harms outcomes in relation to the scope of the COS that they are developing.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | Data availability statement: The authors do not have permission to share data. |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adverse events,core outcome set,harm outcomes,harm reporting,interventions,survey,epidemiology ,/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/2700/2713 |
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Lifespan Health Faculty of Science > Research Groups > Norwich Epidemiology Centre Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Norwich Epidemiology Centre Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Health Services and Primary Care |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | LivePure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 31 Jul 2024 18:30 |
| Last Modified: | 06 Dec 2024 01:41 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/96090 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111474 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |