NDLI: Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Wuytack, Francesca Smith, Valerie Clarke, Mike Williamson, Paula Gargon, Elizabeth
Abstract	Background A core outcome set (COS) can address problems of outcome heterogeneity and outcome reporting bias in trials and systematic reviews, including Cochrane reviews, helping to reduce waste. One of the aims of the international Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative is to link the development and use of COS with the outcomes specified and reported in Cochrane reviews, including the outcomes listed in the summary of findings (SoF) tables. As part of this work, an earlier exploratory survey of the outcomes of newly published 2007 and 2011 Cochrane reviews was performed. This survey examined the use of COS, the variety of specified outcomes, and outcome reporting in Cochrane reviews by Cochrane Review Group (CRG). To examine changes over time and to explore outcomes that were repeatedly specified over time in Cochrane reviews by CRG, we conducted a follow-up survey of outcomes in 2013 Cochrane reviews. Methods A descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews that were first published in 2013. Outcomes specified in the methods sections and reported in the results section of the Cochrane reviews were examined by CRG. We also explored the uptake of SoF tables, the number of outcomes included in these, and the quality of the evidence for the outcomes. Results Across the 50 CRGs, 375 Cochrane reviews that included at least one study specified a total of 3142 outcomes. Of these outcomes, 32 % (1008) were not reported in the results section of these reviews. For 23 % (233) of these non-reported outcomes, we did not find any reason in the text of the review for this non-report. Fifty-seven percent (216/375) of reviews included a SoF table. Conclusions The proportion of specified outcomes that were reported in Cochrane reviews had increased in 2013 (68 %) compared to 2007 (61 %) and 2011 (65 %). Importantly, 2013 Cochrane reviews that did not report specified outcomes were twice as likely to provide an explanation for why the outcome was not reported. There has been an increased uptake of SoF tables in Cochrane reviews. Outcomes that were repeatedly specified in Cochrane reviews by CRG in 2007, 2011, and 2013 may assist COS development.
Related Links	https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13643-015-0060-0.pdf
Ending Page	9
Page Count	9
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	20464053
DOI	10.1186/s13643-015-0060-0
Journal	Systematic Reviews
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	4
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2015-05-19
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Medicine Public Health Biomedicine Statistics for Life Sciences Health Sciences Core outcome set Systematic review Outcome reporting bias Medicine/Public Health
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Medicine
Journal Impact Factor	6.3/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	4.5/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews

Managing the incidence of selective reporting bias: a survey of Cochrane review groups

Can a core outcome set improve the quality of systematic reviews? – a survey of the Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane review groups

COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol)

Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider

Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review (part I)

Core Outcome Set development for LEPtospirosis trials (COS-LEP): a study protocol to develop a core outcome set for the evaluation of clinical therapeutic interventions for human leptospirosis

Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study

The Core Outcome DEvelopment for Carrier Screening (CODECS) study: protocol for development of a core outcome set

Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews

Similar Documents

Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews

Managing the incidence of selective reporting bias: a survey of Cochrane review groups

Can a core outcome set improve the quality of systematic reviews? – a survey of the Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane review groups

COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol)

Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider

Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review (part I)

Core Outcome Set development for LEPtospirosis trials (COS-LEP): a study protocol to develop a core outcome set for the evaluation of clinical therapeutic interventions for human leptospirosis

Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study

The Core Outcome DEvelopment for Carrier Screening (CODECS) study: protocol for development of a core outcome set

Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews