TY - JOUR
T1 - Developing a core outcome set in interventions to prevent stillbirth
T2 - A systematic review on variations of outcome reporting
AU - Kim, Bobae V.
AU - Aromataris, Edoardo C.
AU - de Lint, Willem
AU - Middleton, Philippa
AU - Townsent, Rosemary
AU - Khalil, Asma
AU - Duffy, James M.
AU - Flenady, Vicki
AU - Thangaratinam, Shakila
AU - Mol, Ben W.
N1 - Funding Information:
Professor Mol BWM is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437).
Funding Information:
The COSTIL project was funded by Stillbirth Foundation Australia , The University of Adelaide and The Stillbirth Centre for Research Excellence (CRE) , The University of Queensland . The project protocol, collection of data and analyses were designed and carried out independently from the funders.
PY - 2021/4
Y1 - 2021/4
N2 - Objective: To determine which outcomes have been previously reported in previous stillbirth prevention studies. Research design: Systematic review of reviews: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE and Pubmed for systematic reviews and meta- analyses investigating interventions to prevent stillbirth and its major risk factors. Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers identified and extracted outcomes independently. Outcomes were categorised under relevant domains for analysis. Frequency of each outcome was also determined. Main results: From 51 eligible reviews, 16 reviews addressed stillbirth prevention specifically while 35 reviews evaluated the efficacies of prevention or management of the eight major risk factors of stillbirth. Two hundred and thirty-seven outcomes were extracted, including 150 maternal outcomes and 87 offspring outcomes. Stillbirth (35/51), perinatal mortality (34/51) and neonatal mortality (33/51) were the most commonly reported outcomes followed by birthweight (29/51), caesarean section (28/51) and preeclampsia/eclampsia (23/51). Self-reported mother/family focused outcomes on their experiences and views were reported in 10/51 reviews. Conclusion: In studies evaluating prevention of stillbirth there is a large variety in outcomes, with discrepancies in nomenclature and measurements. Woman/family-centred outcomes are often missing from studies. There is a need for a core outcome sets agreed by all stakeholders containing the recommended minimum data to be reported in future studies investigating prevention of stillbirth.
AB - Objective: To determine which outcomes have been previously reported in previous stillbirth prevention studies. Research design: Systematic review of reviews: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE and Pubmed for systematic reviews and meta- analyses investigating interventions to prevent stillbirth and its major risk factors. Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers identified and extracted outcomes independently. Outcomes were categorised under relevant domains for analysis. Frequency of each outcome was also determined. Main results: From 51 eligible reviews, 16 reviews addressed stillbirth prevention specifically while 35 reviews evaluated the efficacies of prevention or management of the eight major risk factors of stillbirth. Two hundred and thirty-seven outcomes were extracted, including 150 maternal outcomes and 87 offspring outcomes. Stillbirth (35/51), perinatal mortality (34/51) and neonatal mortality (33/51) were the most commonly reported outcomes followed by birthweight (29/51), caesarean section (28/51) and preeclampsia/eclampsia (23/51). Self-reported mother/family focused outcomes on their experiences and views were reported in 10/51 reviews. Conclusion: In studies evaluating prevention of stillbirth there is a large variety in outcomes, with discrepancies in nomenclature and measurements. Woman/family-centred outcomes are often missing from studies. There is a need for a core outcome sets agreed by all stakeholders containing the recommended minimum data to be reported in future studies investigating prevention of stillbirth.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100807084&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.12.036
DO - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.12.036
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85100807084
VL - 259
SP - 196
EP - 206
JO - European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
JF - European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
SN - 0301-2115
ER -