Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec 28;13(12):e0209869.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209869. eCollection 2018.

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 4th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research

Elizabeth Gargon  1 , Sarah L Gorst  1 , Nicola L Harman  1 , Valerie Smith  2 , Karen Matvienko-Sikar  3 , Paula R Williamson  1
Affiliations

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 4th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research

Elizabeth Gargon et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: The Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database is a publically available, searchable repository of published and ongoing core outcome set (COS) studies. An annual systematic review update is carried out to maintain the currency of database content.

Methods: The methods used in the fourth update of the systematic review followed the same approach used in the original review and previous updates. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported the development of a COS, regardless of any restrictions by age, health condition or setting. Searches were carried out in March 2018 to identify studies that had been published or indexed between January 2017 and the end of December 2017.

Results: Forty-eight new studies, describing the development of 56 COS, were included. There has been an increase in the number of studies clearly specifying the scope of the COS in terms of the population (n = 43, 90%) and intervention (n = 48, 100%) characteristics. Public participation has continued to rise with over half (n = 27, 56%) of studies in the current review including input from members of the public. The rate of inclusion of all stakeholder groups has increased, in particular participation from non-clinical research experts has risen from 32% (mean average in previous reviews) to 62% (n = 29). Input from participants located in Australasia (n = 17; 41%), Asia (n = 18; 44%), South America (n = 13; 32%) and Africa (n = 7; 17%) have all increased since the previous reviews.

Conclusion: This update included a pronounced increase in the number of new COS identified compared to the previous three updates. There was an improvement in the reporting of the scope, stakeholder participants and methods used. Furthermore, there has been an increase in participation from Australasia, Asia, South America and Africa. These advancements are reflective of the efforts made in recent years to raise awareness about the need for COS development and uptake, as well as developments in COS methodology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

EG and PW are members of the COMET Management Group. All other authors had no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Identification of studies.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Year of first publication of each COS study (n = 307).
Fig 3
Fig 3. Number of COS developed in each disease category (n = 307).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Williamson PR, Altman DG, Bagley H, Barnes KL, Blazeby JM, Brookes ST, et al. The COMET Handbook: version 1.0. Trials. 2017;18(Suppl 3):280 Epub 2017/07/07. 10.1186/s13063-017-1978-4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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 Epub 2016/01/20. 10.1371/journal.pone.0146444 . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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 Epub 2014/06/17. 10.1371/journal.pone.0099111 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4059640. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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 Epub 2016/12/16. 10.1371/journal.pone.0168403 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5156438 to support COMET and related work. EG is a member of the COMET Management Group and is the COMET Project Co-ordinator. This does not alter the authors' adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Davis K, Gorst SL, Harman N, Smith V, Gargon E, Altman DG, et al. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0190695 Epub 2018/02/14. 10.1371/journal.pone.0190695 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms