Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations
- PMID: 29145404
- PMCID: PMC5689835
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002447
Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations
Abstract
Background: The use of core outcome sets (COS) ensures that researchers measure and report those outcomes that are most likely to be relevant to users of their research. Several hundred COS projects have been systematically identified to date, but there has been no formal quality assessment of these studies. The Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development (COS-STAD) project aimed to identify minimum standards for the design of a COS study agreed upon by an international group, while other specific guidance exists for the final reporting of COS development studies (Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting [COS-STAR]).
Methods and findings: An international group of experienced COS developers, methodologists, journal editors, potential users of COS (clinical trialists, systematic reviewers, and clinical guideline developers), and patient representatives produced the COS-STAD recommendations to help improve the quality of COS development and support the assessment of whether a COS had been developed using a reasonable approach. An open survey of experts generated an initial list of items, which was refined by a 2-round Delphi survey involving nearly 250 participants representing key stakeholder groups. Participants assigned importance ratings for each item using a 1-9 scale. Consensus that an item should be included in the set of minimum standards was defined as at least 70% of the voting participants from each stakeholder group providing a score between 7 and 9. The Delphi survey was followed by a consensus discussion with the study management group representing multiple stakeholder groups. COS-STAD contains 11 minimum standards that are the minimum design recommendations for all COS development projects. The recommendations focus on 3 key domains: the scope, the stakeholders, and the consensus process.
Conclusions: The COS-STAD project has established 11 minimum standards to be followed by COS developers when planning their projects and by users when deciding whether a COS has been developed using reasonable methods.
Conflict of interest statement
I have read the journal's policy and have the following conflicts: DGA, JMB, MC, ST, and PRW are members of the COMET Management Group. KD and JJK declare no competing interests.
Similar articles
-
COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol).Trials. 2015 Aug 22;16:373. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0913-9. Trials. 2015. PMID: 26297658 Free PMC article.
-
Pediatric core outcome sets had deficiencies and lacked child and family input: A methodological review.J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Mar;155:13-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.12.009. Epub 2022 Dec 15. J Clin Epidemiol. 2023. PMID: 36528231 Review.
-
Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting: The COS-STAR Statement.PLoS Med. 2016 Oct 18;13(10):e1002148. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002148. eCollection 2016 Oct. PLoS Med. 2016. PMID: 27755541 Free PMC article.
-
Improvement was needed in the standards of development for cancer core outcome sets.J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Aug;112:36-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.04.006. Epub 2019 Apr 19. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019. PMID: 31009657
-
Core Outcome Set-STAndardised Protocol Items: the COS-STAP Statement.Trials. 2019 Feb 11;20(1):116. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3230-x. Trials. 2019. PMID: 30744706 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Something borrowed, something new: measuring hospital performance in the context of value based health care.Eur J Health Econ. 2021 Aug;22(6):851-854. doi: 10.1007/s10198-020-01209-5. Eur J Health Econ. 2021. PMID: 32548650 No abstract available.
-
Development of a core outcome set in the clinical trials of traditional Chinese medicine for diabetic foot: A study protocol.Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Nov 9;9:1025833. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1025833. eCollection 2022. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022. PMID: 36438030 Free PMC article.
-
Core outcome set for three ophthalmic conditions: a healthcare professional and patient consensus on core outcome sets for amblyopia, ocular motility and strabismus (COSAMS Study).BMJ Open. 2021 May 11;11(5):e042403. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042403. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 33980515 Free PMC article.
-
Core outcome set for the management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the COS-AECOPD ERS Task Force study protocol.ERJ Open Res. 2020 Sep 14;6(3):00193-2020. doi: 10.1183/23120541.00193-2020. eCollection 2020 Jul. ERJ Open Res. 2020. PMID: 32964006 Free PMC article.
-
Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for stillbirth care research (iCHOOSE Study).BMJ Open. 2022 Feb 9;12(2):e056629. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056629. BMJ Open. 2022. PMID: 35140161 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, Devane D, Gargon E, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials 2012; 13:132 doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-132 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Gargon E, Gurung B, Medley N, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, et al. Choosing Important Health Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2014; 9(6): e99111 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099111 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Gorst SL, Gargon E, Clarke M, Blazeby JM, Altman DG, Williamson PR. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: an updated review and user survey. PLoS ONE 2016; 11(1): e0146444 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146444 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Gorst SL, Gargon E, Clarke M, Smith V, Williamson PR. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: an updated review and identification of gaps. PLoS ONE 2016; 11(12):e0168403 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168403 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- COMET Initiative Database Search 2017. [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.cometinitiative.org/studies/search. [Accessed 15 May 2017].
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Molecular Biology Databases