Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health: a systematic review

J. M.N. Duffy, R. Rolph, C. Gale, M. Hirsch, K. S. Khan, S. Ziebland, R. J. McManus, Janneke van‘t Hooft, Mark Brown, William Grobman, Ray Fitzpatrick, S. Karumanchi, Nuala Lucas, Laura Magee, Ben Mol, Michael Stark, Shakila Thangaratinam, Mathew Wilson, Peter von Dadelszen, Paula Williamson & 1 others On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE)

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. Objective: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. Search strategy: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. Selection criteria: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. Data collection and analysis: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. Results: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48%) or 2016 (n = 16; 32%). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16%) and newborn health (n = 3; 6%) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52%) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1%), national (n = 18; 38%), and regional (n = 4; 8%) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. Conclusions: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. Tweetable abstract: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50% funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.

LanguageEnglish
Pages1481-1489
Number of pages9
JournalBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Volume124
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2017

Keywords

  • Core outcome sets
  • neonatology
  • obstetrics and gynaecology
  • systematic review
  • women's health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

Duffy, J. M. N., Rolph, R., Gale, C., Hirsch, M., Khan, K. S., Ziebland, S., ... On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE) (2017). Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health: a systematic review. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 124(10), 1481-1489. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14694
Duffy, J. M.N. ; Rolph, R. ; Gale, C. ; Hirsch, M. ; Khan, K. S. ; Ziebland, S. ; McManus, R. J. ; van‘t Hooft, Janneke ; Brown, Mark ; Grobman, William ; Fitzpatrick, Ray ; Karumanchi, S. ; Lucas, Nuala ; Magee, Laura ; Mol, Ben ; Stark, Michael ; Thangaratinam, Shakila ; Wilson, Mathew ; von Dadelszen, Peter ; Williamson, Paula ; On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE). / Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health : a systematic review. In: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2017 ; Vol. 124, No. 10. pp. 1481-1489.
@article{0e4852e27b574309b7c6eb289ed68107,
title = "Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health: a systematic review",
abstract = "Background: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. Objective: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. Search strategy: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. Selection criteria: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. Data collection and analysis: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. Results: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48{\%}) or 2016 (n = 16; 32{\%}). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16{\%}) and newborn health (n = 3; 6{\%}) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52{\%}) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1{\%}), national (n = 18; 38{\%}), and regional (n = 4; 8{\%}) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. Conclusions: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. Tweetable abstract: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50{\%} funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.",
keywords = "Core outcome sets, neonatology, obstetrics and gynaecology, systematic review, women's health",
author = "Duffy, {J. M.N.} and R. Rolph and C. Gale and M. Hirsch and Khan, {K. S.} and S. Ziebland and McManus, {R. J.} and {van‘t Hooft}, Janneke and Mark Brown and William Grobman and Ray Fitzpatrick and S. Karumanchi and Nuala Lucas and Laura Magee and Ben Mol and Michael Stark and Shakila Thangaratinam and Mathew Wilson and {von Dadelszen}, Peter and Paula Williamson and {On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE)}",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1471-0528.14694",
language = "English",
volume = "124",
pages = "1481--1489",
journal = "BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology",
issn = "1470-0328",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "10",

}

Duffy, JMN, Rolph, R, Gale, C, Hirsch, M, Khan, KS, Ziebland, S, McManus, RJ, van‘t Hooft, J, Brown, M, Grobman, W, Fitzpatrick, R, Karumanchi, S, Lucas, N, Magee, L, Mol, B, Stark, M, Thangaratinam, S, Wilson, M, von Dadelszen, P, Williamson, P & On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE) 2017, 'Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health: a systematic review', BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, vol. 124, no. 10, pp. 1481-1489. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14694

Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health : a systematic review. / Duffy, J. M.N.; Rolph, R.; Gale, C.; Hirsch, M.; Khan, K. S.; Ziebland, S.; McManus, R. J.; van‘t Hooft, Janneke; Brown, Mark; Grobman, William; Fitzpatrick, Ray; Karumanchi, S.; Lucas, Nuala; Magee, Laura; Mol, Ben; Stark, Michael; Thangaratinam, Shakila; Wilson, Mathew; von Dadelszen, Peter; Williamson, Paula; On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE).

In: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 124, No. 10, 01.09.2017, p. 1481-1489.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health

T2 - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

AU - Duffy, J. M.N.

AU - Rolph, R.

AU - Gale, C.

AU - Hirsch, M.

AU - Khan, K. S.

AU - Ziebland, S.

AU - McManus, R. J.

AU - van‘t Hooft, Janneke

AU - Brown, Mark

AU - Grobman, William

AU - Fitzpatrick, Ray

AU - Karumanchi, S.

AU - Lucas, Nuala

AU - Magee, Laura

AU - Mol, Ben

AU - Stark, Michael

AU - Thangaratinam, Shakila

AU - Wilson, Mathew

AU - von Dadelszen, Peter

AU - Williamson, Paula

AU - On behalf of the International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE)

PY - 2017/9/1

Y1 - 2017/9/1

N2 - Background: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. Objective: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. Search strategy: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. Selection criteria: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. Data collection and analysis: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. Results: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48%) or 2016 (n = 16; 32%). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16%) and newborn health (n = 3; 6%) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52%) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1%), national (n = 18; 38%), and regional (n = 4; 8%) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. Conclusions: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. Tweetable abstract: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50% funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.

AB - Background: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. Objective: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. Search strategy: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. Selection criteria: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. Data collection and analysis: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. Results: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48%) or 2016 (n = 16; 32%). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16%) and newborn health (n = 3; 6%) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52%) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1%), national (n = 18; 38%), and regional (n = 4; 8%) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. Conclusions: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. Tweetable abstract: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50% funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.

KW - Core outcome sets

KW - neonatology

KW - obstetrics and gynaecology

KW - systematic review

KW - women's health

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027853809&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1471-0528.14694

DO - 10.1111/1471-0528.14694

M3 - Review article

VL - 124

SP - 1481

EP - 1489

JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

JF - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

SN - 1470-0328

IS - 10

ER -