ArticleJournal of multimorbidity and comorbidity
Prioritising and ranking methodological uncertainties in the design, conduct, and analysis of trials aiming to improve health outcomes for those living with multiple long-term conditions: A protocol for a modified Delphi study.
Article in Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidity. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs), defined as the co-existence of two or more chronic health conditions, are increasingly prevalent across all age groups and disproportionately affect socioeconomically disadvantaged and ethnic minority populations. Trials targeting MLTCs face methodological challenges due to patient heterogeneity, variation in selection of conditions and limitations in design and analysis. These challenges may contribute to the lack of evidence to inform effective interventions for people with MLTCs. This study aims to systematically identify and prioritise key methodological uncertainties in the design, conduct and analysis of future trials aiming to improve health outcomes for people with MLTCs. Methods: We will conduct a four-round modified Delphi study involving key interest groups including methodologists, trialists, MLTC researchers, research funders, commissioners, regulators, people with MLTC lived experience and MLTC carers. The process will include two rounds of online questionnaires, one lived-experience meeting (in-person or virtual) and a final virtual consensus meeting. To promote inclusivity and diversity of input, participants may join at any stage. Responses from each round will be analysed and summarised to inform the next stage, with final priorities agreed through structured consensus voting. Expected Outcomes: This consensus study will produce a ranked list of methodological research uncertainties to guide future research and clinical trial design, conduct and analysis in MLTCs. Findings will be disseminated through a facilitated online dissemination workshop, academic channels and targeted public engagement activities to support inclusive and relevant MLTC research.
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.