Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29191216›Full record

ArticleTrials2017

COSUMO: study protocol for the development of a core outcome set for efficacy and effectiveness trials in posterior segment-involving uveitis.

Mohammad O Tallouzi, Jonathan M Mathers, David J Moore, Philip I Murray, Nicholas Bucknall, Jane M Blazeby, Melanie Calvert, Alastair K Denniston

Open access · goldAbstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammad O TallouziInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. mxt500@bham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1356-9381
Jonathan M MathersInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
David J MooreInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Philip I MurrayAcademic Unit of Ophthalmology, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Nicholas BucknallPatient Involvement Group in Uveitis (PInGU), Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Jane M BlazebyCentre for Surgical Research, School of Social & Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Clifton, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Melanie CalvertInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Alastair K DennistonAcademic Unit of Ophthalmology, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
University of Birmingham · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

Department of Health CDRF-2014-05-057Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1National Institute for Health Research CDRF-2014-05-057
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUveitis, a group of disorders characterised by intraocular inflammation, causes 10-15% of total blindness in the developed world. The most sight-threatening uveitis affects the posterior segment of the eye (posterior-segment involving uveitis (PSIU)). Numerous different outcomes have been used in clinical trials evaluating alternative treatments for uveitis, limiting inter-trial comparison and aggregation of data. We aim to develop a core outcome set (COS) that would provide a standardised set of outcomes to be measured and reported in all effectiveness trials for PSIU.

methodsA three-phase design will be used informed by recommendations from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative. Phase 1: a comprehensive list of outcomes will be identified through both a systematic review of effectiveness trials of PSIU and qualitative research with stakeholders. The qualitative study will comprise focus groups with patients and their carers in parallel with one-to-one telephone interviews with health professionals and policy-makers. In the focus groups, patients will be grouped according to whether or not their uveitis is complicated by the sight-threatening condition uveitic macular oedema (UMO) since it is hypothesised that the presence of UMO may significantly impact on patient experience of PSIU. Phase 2: Delphi methodology will be used to reduce the range of potential outcomes for the core set. Up to three Delphi rounds will be used through an online survey. Participants will be asked to rate the importance of each outcome on a 9-point Likert scale where 9 is most important. Phase 3: a consensus meeting will be held with key stakeholders to discuss the Delphi results and ratify the final outcomes to be included in the COS. DISCUSSION: The development of an agreed COS for PSIU would help ensure that outcomes which matter to key stakeholders are captured and reported in a consistent way. A COS for PSIU would allow greater comparison and aggregation of data across trials for the better evaluation of established and emerging therapies through evidence synthesis and meta-analysis to inform clinical guidelines and health policy.

trial registrationCOMET. http://comet-initiative.org/studies/details/640 . August 2015.

Indexed as

Endpoint DeterminationResearch DesignClinical Trials as TopicConsensusDelphi TechniqueFocus GroupsHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationInterviews as TopicStakeholder ParticipationSystematic Reviews as TopicTreatment OutcomeUveitis, PosteriorClinical trialsConsensus methodCore outcome setDelphiDomainFocus groupInterviewsKey stakeholdersMacular oedemaUveitis

Identifiers

PMID29191216
PMCPMC5709828
OpenAlexW2774890422

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.