SynthesisBMJ open2021
Inclusion of participants from low-income and middle-income countries in core outcome sets development: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Core outcome set for intervention research on snakebite envenomation in South Asia.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2026Pooled it
- Core outcome sets for trials of interventions to prevent and to treat multimorbidity in adults in low and middle-income countries: the COSMOS study.BMJ global health · 2024Pooled it
- Adaptation of the Wound Healing Questionnaire universal-reporter outcome measure for use in global surgery trials (TALON-1 study): mixed-methods study and Rasch analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2023Trial
- Sleeping without borders: Gaps in contextualizing sleep duration guidelines for adults in low-income countries.Sleep medicine: X · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Statins for preventing preeclampsia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- A meta-core outcome set for stillbirth prevention and bereavement care following stillbirth in LMIC.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for respectful maternal and newborn care in a low-middle income setting.PloS one · 2025Article
- Use, knowledge, & attitudes on core outcome sets among trialists & systematic reviewers in India: A survey.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Core outcome sets for trials of interventions to prevent and to treat multimorbidity in low- and middle-income countries: the COSMOS study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Experiences of core outcome set developers on including stakeholders from low- and middle-income countries: An online survey.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Investigating the Secondary Use of Clinical Research Data: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Awareness and experiences on core outcome set development and use amongst stakeholders from low- and middle- income countries: An online survey.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Core outcomes in neonatal encephalopathy: a qualitative study with parents.BMJ paediatrics open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveOur study aims to describe differences or similarities in the scope, participant characteristics and methods used in core outcome sets (COS) development when only participants from high-income countries (HICs) were involved compared with when participants from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) were also involved.
designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: Annual Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials systematic reviews of COS which are updated based on SCOPUS and MEDLINE, searches. The latest systematic review included studies published up to the end of 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included studies reporting development of a COS for use in research regardless of age, health condition or setting. Studies reporting the development of a COS for patient-reported outcomes or adverse events or complications were also included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted in relation to scope of the COS study, participant categories and the methods used in outcome selection.
resultsStudies describing 370 COS were identified in the database. Of these, 75 (20%) included participants from LMICs. Only four COS were initiated from an LMIC setting. More than half of COS with LMIC participants were developed in the last 5 years. Cancer and rheumatology were the dominant disease domains. Overall, over 259 (70%) of COS explicitly reported including clinical experts; this was higher where LMIC participants were also included 340 (92%). Most LMIC participants were from China, Brazil and South Africa. Mixed methods for consensus building were used across the two settings.
conclusionProgress has been made in including LMIC participants in the development of COS, however, there is a need to explore how to enable initiation of COS development from a range of LMIC settings, how to ensure prioritisation of COS that better reflects the burden of disease in these contexts and how to improve public participation from LMICs.
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.