Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30732617›Full record

ArticleTrials2019

COSUTI: a protocol for the development of a core outcome set (COS) for interventions for the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) in adults.

Sinead Duane, Akke Vellinga, Andrew W Murphy, Martin Cormican, Andrew Smyth, Patricia Healy, Michael Moore, Paul Little, Declan Devane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. ChronicJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

9 authors.

Sinead DuaneHRB Trials Methodology Research Network, College of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland. sinead.duane@nuigalway.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9228-7322
Akke VellingaDiscipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Andrew W MurphyDiscipline of General Practice, HRB Primary Care Clinical Trial Network Ireland, College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Martin CormicanDiscipline of Bacteriology, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Andrew SmythHRB Clinical Research Facility Galway, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Patricia HealyHRB Trials Methodology Research Network, College of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Michael MoorePrimary Care and Population Sciences, Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK.
Paul LittlePrimary Care and Population Sciences, Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK.
Declan DevaneHRB Trials Methodology Research Network, College of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

Health Research Board CTN-2014-011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are the second most common infection presenting in the community. Clinical guidelines and decision aids assist health practitioners to treat a UTI; however, treatment practices vary due to patient needs and context of presentation. Numerous trials have evaluated the effectiveness of treatment interventions for UTI; however, it is difficult to compare the results between trials due to inconsistencies between reported outcomes. Poor choice of outcome measures can lead to impairment of evidence synthesis due to the inability to compare outcomes between trials with similar aims. Transparency in selecting and reporting outcomes can be mitigated through the development of an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be reported in clinical trials, referred to as a core outcome set (COS). This paper presents the protocol for the development of a COS for interventions in the treatment of uncomplicated UTI in adults.

methodsThis COS development consists of three phases. Phase 1 is a systematic review, which aims to identify the core outcomes that have been reported in trials and systematic reviews of interventions treating uncomplicated UTI in adults. Phase 2 consists of a three-round online Delphi survey with stakeholders in the area of treatment interventions for UTI. The aim of this online Delphi survey is to achieve consensus on the importance of the outcomes emerging from Phase 1 of this research. Phase 3 is a consensus meeting to finalise the COS that should be reported in trials evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of UTI. DISCUSSION: It is hoped that the development of a COS for interventions for the treatment of uncomplicated UTI in adults will be adopted as a minimum set of outcomes that should be reported and measured within this context. If the findings from clinical trials related to treatment interventions for UTI are to impact on policy and practice, it is important that the findings from different treatment interventions are comparable across trials.

Indexed as

Endpoint DeterminationResearch DesignAnti-Bacterial AgentsClinical Trials as TopicConsensusConsensus Statements as TopicDelphi TechniqueHumansStakeholder ParticipationSystematic Reviews as TopicTreatment OutcomeUrinary Tract InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCore outcome setCystitisDelphi surveySystematic reviewUrinary tract infections

Identifiers

PMID30732617
PMCPMC6367821

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.