Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42760899›Full record

ArticleHRB open research2025

Protocol for a novel approach to developing a single pan-specialty 'meta-core outcome set': An example from the field of surgical oncology.

Joel Tay, Jane Blazeby, Adam O'Neill, Yoon Loke, Aoife Lowery, Catherine Robinson, Bilal Alkhaffaf, Jamie Kirkham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in HRB open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Joel TayCentre for Biostatistics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6939-3442
Jane BlazebyNIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK.
Adam O'NeillSocial Care and Society, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9860-8545
Yoon LokeNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, England, UK.
Aoife LoweryDiscipline of Surgery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Catherine RobinsonSocial Care and Society, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, England, UK.
Bilal AlkhaffafDepartment of Oesophago-Gastric and Bariatric Surgery, Salford Royal Hospital, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK.
Jamie KirkhamCentre for Biostatistics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Understanding outcomes of surgery performed with curative intent for different cancer types allows comparisons to be made provided consistent outcomes are selected and measured. At present core outcome sets (COS) that represent the minimum outcomes measured and reported in any clinical trial for a given condition exists for six of the ten most prevalent cancer types but it is uncertain whether this can be used to inform the development of a meta-COS (core outcome set) for any cancer type requiring a surgical operation with curative intent. This paper describes our study protocol to develop a meta-COS for surgical oncology. Methods: Three stages of work will be conducted : (1) identification of a long list of outcomes including adverse events from previously published COS, a review of outcomes from trials registered with Discussion: The meta-COS for surgical oncology trials will ensure that a selection of relevant outcomes will be available for use in all research studies for any cancer type requiring a surgical intervention. Registration: This study titled "A meta-Core Outcome Set (COS) for surgical oncology" is registered on the COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative database. ( https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/3252).

Indexed as

Adverse eventsCancerConsensusCore Outcome setMeta-COSOncologySurgery

Identifiers

PMID42760899
PMCPMC13583348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.