医学
结果(博弈论)
胶质瘤
德尔菲法
临床试验
随机对照试验
生活质量(医疗保健)
心理学
家庭医学
内科学
计算机科学
护理部
人工智能
数学
数理经济学
癌症研究
作者
Ameeta Retzer,Elin Baddeley,Stephanie Sivell,Hannah Scott,Annmarie Nelson,Helen Bulbeck,Kathy Seddon,Robin Grant,Richard Adams,Colin Watts,Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi,Pamela Kearns,Samantha Cruz Rivera,Linda Dirven,Melanie Calvert,Anthony Byrne
标识
DOI:10.1093/noajnl/vdad096
摘要
Abstract Background Glioma interventional studies should collect data aligned with patient priorities, enabling treatment benefit assessment and informed decision-making. This requires effective data synthesis and meta-analyses, underpinned by consistent trial outcome measurement, analysis, and reporting. Development of a core outcome set (COS) may contribute to a solution. Methods A 5-stage process was used to develop a COS for glioma trials from the UK perspective. Outcome lists were generated in stages 1: a trial registry review and systematic review of qualitative studies and 2: interviews with glioma patients and caregivers. In stage 3, the outcome lists were de-duplicated with accessible terminology, in stage 4 outcomes were rated via a 2-round Delphi process, and stage 5 comprised a consensus meeting to finalize the COS. Patient-reportable COS outcomes were identified. Results In Delphi round 1, 96 participants rated 35 outcomes identified in stages 1 and 2, to which a further 10 were added. Participants (77/96) rated the resulting 45 outcomes in round 2. Of these, 22 outcomes met a priori threshold for inclusion in the COS. After further review, a COS consisting of 19 outcomes grouped into 7 outcome domains (survival, adverse events, activities of daily living, health-related quality of life, seizure activity, cognitive function, and physical function) was finalized by 13 participants at the consensus meeting. Conclusions A COS for glioma trials was developed, comprising 7 outcome domains. Additional research will identify appropriate measurement tools and further validate this COS.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI