Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26625730›Full record

ArticleTrials2015

A core outcome set for all types of cardiac surgery effectiveness trials: a study protocol for an international eDelphi survey to achieve consensus on what to measure and the subsequent selection of measurement instruments.

A Moza, C Benstoem, R Autschbach, C Stoppe, A Goetzenich

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

A MozaDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. amoza@ukaachen.de.
C BenstoemDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. cbenstoem@ukaachen.de.
R AutschbachDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. rautschbach@ukaachen.de.
C StoppeDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. christian.stoppe@gmail.com.
A GoetzenichDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. agoetzenich@ukaachen.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major contributor to the burden of disease and the number one cause of death worldwide. From 1990 until today, more people died from coronary heart disease than from any other cause. CVD is regularly treated with minimally or non-minimally invasive off- or on-pump cardiothoracic surgery and several interventions related to the outcome of the surgical procedures have been evaluated in clinical trials, but heterogeneity in outcome reporting hinders comparison of interventions across trials and limits the ability of research synthesis. This problem is encountered with the introduction of core outcome sets (COSs), which should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all clinical trials for a specific clinical field. METHODS/

designThis study protocol describes the methods used to develop a COS for all types of cardiac surgery effectiveness trials. We aim to reach consensus on what to measure in an international three-round eDelphi exercise involving adult patients in need or after cardiothoracic surgery, cardiothoracic surgeons, cardiologists, anaesthesiologists, nursing staff and researchers with expertise in this particular field of medical research. Subsequently, outcome measurement instruments (how to measure) will be determined. Recommendations on COS development given by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Initiative were followed. DISCUSSION: The proposed COS aims to provide methodological guidance for future cardiothoracic surgical trials to ensure the comparability of effects of interventions across studies and enable research synthesis. This does not imply that primary outcomes should always and exclusively be those of the COS. However, to ensure the comparability of results across trials, the outcomes included in this COS should be considered for inclusion besides measuring trial-specific clinical endpoints.

Indexed as

Cardiac Surgical ProceduresDelphi TechniqueEndpoint DeterminationResearch DesignClinical Trials as TopicConsensusCooperative BehaviorHumansInternational CooperationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26625730
PMCPMC4667508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.