ArticleTrials2016
Appraising the uptake and use of recommendations for a common outcome data set for clinical trials: a case study in fall injury prevention.
Article in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- A systematic review finds Core Outcome Set uptake varies widely across different areas of health.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- Multifactorial and multiple component interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- In-depth qualitative interviews identified barriers and facilitators that influenced chief investigators' use of core outcome sets in randomised controlled trials.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Trial
- Fall prevention interventions in primary care to reduce fractures and falls in people aged 70 years and over: the PreFIT three-arm cluster RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Trial
- E-ACTIVE AGING study protocol: Evaluating an exergame-based and multicomponent exercise program for community-dwelling older adults at risk of falling.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Outcome domains measured in randomized controlled trials of physical activity for older adults: a rapid review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023Review
- Perspectives: Evaluation of Older Adult Cochlear Implant Candidates for Fall Risk in a Developing Country Setting.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Article
- Assessing the impact of a research funder's recommendation to consider core outcome sets.PloS one · 2019Article
- Implementing core outcomes in kidney disease: report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) implementation workshop.Kidney international · 2018Article
- Development of a Core Outcome Set for Clinical Effectiveness Trials in Esophageal Cancer Resection Surgery.Annals of surgery · 2018Article
- The COMET Handbook: version 1.0.Trials · 2017Review
- Citation analysis did not provide a reliable assessment of core outcome set uptake.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2017Article
- Core Domains for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors: An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study.Critical care medicine · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany researchers and professional bodies are seeking consensus for core outcomes for clinical trials. The Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) developed a common outcome data set for fall injury prevention trials 10 years ago. This study assesses the impact of these recommendations.
methodsA systematic search (up to 16 January 2015) was performed using Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed for articles citing the ProFaNE recommendations. Randomised trials on fall prevention in older people were selected for further analysis. Data were extracted on study characteristics and adherence to the key domains recommended by the ProFaNE consensus: falls, fall injury, physical activity, psychological consequences and health-related quality of life. Details of non-recommended outcome measures used were also recorded.
resultsThe ProFaNE recommendations were cited in a total of 464 published articles, of which 34 were randomised trials on fall prevention in older people. Only one study (3 %) reported on all core domains. Most of the trials reported on falls (n = 32/34, 94 %) as a core outcome measure. Most of the recommendations within the falls domain were well-followed. Around half of the trials reported on fall-related injury (n = 16/34, 47 %). However, none reported the number of radiologically confirmed peripheral fracture events, which is the recommended outcome measure for injury. The other key domains (quality of life, physical activity and psychological consequences) were less frequently reported on, with a lack of consistency in the outcome measures used.
conclusionsThe ProFaNE recommendations had a limited effect on standardising the reporting of outcomes in randomised trials on fall injury prevention in older people during the search period. Authors of consensus guidelines should consider maximising buy-in by including a diversity of geographic areas and academic disciplines at the development stage and using a solid dissemination strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.