ArticleTrials2025
The complexity of outcome measure selection within multiple long-term condition research: an analysis of exercise-based rehabilitation trials.
Article in Trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConsistent evidence has demonstrated the health benefits of exercise-based rehabilitation across various long-term conditions (LTC); however, evidence in people with multiple LTC (MLTC; or 'multimorbidity') is unclear. Development and evaluation of these interventions for MLTC requires a consensus on relevant outcome measures. We aimed to map the outcomes collected and reported in trials of exercise-based rehabilitation in people with MLTC to an existing core outcome set for MLTC (COSmm), and compare to outcomes reported in exercise-based rehabilitation trials of single LTC.
methodsA secondary analysis of two systematic reviews assessing exercise-based rehabilitation in MLTC. Outcome measures within included trials were categorised into domains and mapped to the existing COSmm. Domains and measures were also extracted from an overview of systematic reviews investigating exercise-based rehabilitation across single LTC.
resultsTwo hundred seventeen outcome measures across 59 trials of exercise-based rehabilitation for MLTC were identified. The most common domains were exercise capacity (26 outcomes across 41 trials (69.5%)) and health-related quality of life (18 outcomes across 35 trials (59.3%)). Mapping to COSmm showed consistency in the collection and reporting of outcomes in the domains of physical function, health-related quality of life, mental health, and intervention adherence. However, no outcome measures could be mapped to domains of communication, shared decision-making, prioritisation, or quality healthcare. Analysis of the overview of systematic reviews across single LTC found heterogeneity in outcome measures with common measures being relatively similar to those reported in MLTC populations.
conclusionCurrent outcomes collected and reported in published trials of exercise-based rehabilitation for MLTC appear to only partially map to the domains of the COSmm. This review highlights the need to consider the specific core outcome set domains needed for collection in future trials of intervention for MLTC including exercise-based rehabilitation.
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.