Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27580586›Full record

ArticleTrials2016

Development of a core outcome set for clinical trials in rosacea: study protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey.

Sanjana Iyengar, Paula R Williamson, Jochen Schmitt, Lena Johannsen, Ian A Maher, Joseph F Sobanko, Todd V Cartee, Daniel Schlessinger, Emily Poon, Murad Alam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors.

Sanjana IyengarDepartment of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 676 N. St. Clair St., Ste 1600, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Paula R WilliamsonDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Jochen SchmittCentre for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Lena JohannsenCentre for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Ian A MaherDepartment of Dermatology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Joseph F SobankoDepartment of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Todd V CarteeDepartment of Dermatology, Penn State Hershey Dermatology, Hershey, PA, USA.
Daniel SchlessingerDepartment of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 676 N. St. Clair St., Ste 1600, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Emily PoonDepartment of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 676 N. St. Clair St., Ste 1600, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Murad AlamDepartment of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 676 N. St. Clair St., Ste 1600, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. m-alam@northwestern.edu.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K025635/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRosacea is a chronic inflammatory disorder affecting millions of individuals worldwide. Diagnosis is based on signs and symptoms with management and treatment aimed to suppress inflammatory lesions, erythema, and telangiectasia. While many clinical trials of rosacea exist, the lack of consensus in outcome reporting across all trials poses a concern. Proper evaluation and comparison of treatment modalities is challenging. In order to address the inconsistencies present, this project aims to determine a core set of outcomes which should be evaluated in all clinical trials of rosacea. METHODS/

designThis project will utilize a methodology similar to previous core outcome set research. A long list of outcomes will be extracted over four phases: (1) systematic literature review, (2) patient interviews, (3) other published sources, and (4) stakeholder involvement. Potential outcomes will be examined by the Steering Committee to provide further insight. The Delphi process will then be performed to prioritize and condense the list of outcomes generated. Two homogenous groups of physicians and patients will participate in two consecutive rounds of Delphi surveys. A consensus meeting, composed of physicians, patients, and stakeholders, will be conducted after the Delphi exercise to further select outcomes, taking into account participant scores. By the end of the meeting, members will vote and decide on a final recommended set of core outcomes. For the duration of the study, we will be in collaboration with both the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and Cochrane Skin Group - Core Outcome Set Initiative (CSG-COUSIN). DISCUSSION: This study aims to develop a core outcome set to guide assessment in clinical trials of rosacea. The end-goal is to improve the reliability and consistency of outcome reporting, thereby allowing sufficient evaluation of treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsClinical Trials as TopicDelphi TechniquePatient Outcome AssessmentHumansPatient-Centered CareRosaceaSystematic Reviews as TopicTreatment OutcomeConsensusCore outcome setDelphiRosaceaStakeholdersSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID27580586
PMCPMC5007842

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.