ArticleBMC primary care2025
A core outcome set for acute otitis media (COS-AOM) for primary and community care studies.
Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- ENHANCE: a global collaborative research programme investigating the role of homeopathy in antimicrobial stewardship.Frontiers in antibiotics · 2026Article
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
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveOutcome heterogeneity reported in Acute Otitis Media (AOM) research hinders evidence accumulation. Identification of a Core Outcome Set (COS) to report on in future studies in AOM is warranted.
methodsPhase 1: Candidate outcomes identification by reviewing previously reported outcomes in systematic reviews of AOM. Phase 2: In a Parent and Public Involvement (PPI) meeting candidate outcomes were discussed on their importance, presence, and absence. Phase 3: The clinical perspective of health professionals and pharmacists was anonymously gained through a ranking task. Phase 4: An International Steering Committee (ISC) discussed the ranked outcomes and advised on the final COS.
results51 candidate outcomes were identified from 3 reviews and summarised to 20 overarching outcomes in Phase 1. Eight parents participated in the PPI meeting. 28 participants (11 GPs, 11 Traditional Complementary and Integrative medicine (TCIM) Professionals, 6 Pharmacists) ranked the 20 outcome cards. Moderate agreement in ranking was reached within all 3 medical groups, with pharmacists showing the highest agreement (0.540) and the TCIM professionals the lowest (0.421). Correlation coefficients between the groups show a sufficiently high agreement (P < 0.01). The ICS confirmed the final COS-AOM including 8 acute outcomes and 2 mid-long-term outcomes. Agreement for each outcome was reached with 100%.
conclusionThe proposed COS defines a minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported in primary care and community studies on AOM, including TCIM clinical trials, to enhance evidence-based knowledge. Future research should focus on validating commonly used measurement tools for these outcomes and enhancing findings' generalisability beyond the UK, Europe and primary care settings.
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.