Cargando…

Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets

OBJECTIVE/DESIGN/SETTING: This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare disea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mossey, Peter A, Lai, Jason, Meazzini, Maria Costanza, Breugem, Corstiaan, Mark, Hans, Mink van der Molen, Aebele B, Persson, Martin, Davies, Gareth, Ozawa, Terumi Okada
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37279564
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjad023
_version_ 1785151993027756032
author Mossey, Peter A
Lai, Jason
Meazzini, Maria Costanza
Breugem, Corstiaan
Mark, Hans
Mink van der Molen, Aebele B
Persson, Martin
Davies, Gareth
Ozawa, Terumi Okada
author_facet Mossey, Peter A
Lai, Jason
Meazzini, Maria Costanza
Breugem, Corstiaan
Mark, Hans
Mink van der Molen, Aebele B
Persson, Martin
Davies, Gareth
Ozawa, Terumi Okada
author_sort Mossey, Peter A
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE/DESIGN/SETTING: This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare diseases (ERN CRANIO) and achieve a core outcome set for cleft care providers worldwide. INTERVENTION/METHOD: Five orofacial cleft (OFC) disciplines were identified, within which all of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) outcomes fall. One questionnaire was designed for each discipline and comprised 1. the relevant ICHOM’s outcomes within that discipline, and 2. a series of questions targeted to clinicians. What core outcomes are currently measured and when, did these align with the ICHOM minimum, if not how did they differ, and would they recommend modified or additional outcomes?. RESULTS: For some disciplines participants agreed with the ICHOM minimums but urged for earlier and more frequent intervention. Some clinicians felt that some of the ICHOM standards were compatible but that different ages were preferred and for others the ICHOM standards were acceptable but developmental stages should be preferred to absolute time points. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: Core outcomes for OFC were supported in principle but there are differences between the ICHOM recommendations and the 2002 WHO global consensus. The latter are established in many centres with historical archives of OFC outcome data, and it was concluded that with some modifications ICHOM could be moulded into useful core outcomes data for inter-centre comparisons worldwide.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10687512
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106875122023-12-01 Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets Mossey, Peter A Lai, Jason Meazzini, Maria Costanza Breugem, Corstiaan Mark, Hans Mink van der Molen, Aebele B Persson, Martin Davies, Gareth Ozawa, Terumi Okada Eur J Orthod Original Articles OBJECTIVE/DESIGN/SETTING: This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare diseases (ERN CRANIO) and achieve a core outcome set for cleft care providers worldwide. INTERVENTION/METHOD: Five orofacial cleft (OFC) disciplines were identified, within which all of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) outcomes fall. One questionnaire was designed for each discipline and comprised 1. the relevant ICHOM’s outcomes within that discipline, and 2. a series of questions targeted to clinicians. What core outcomes are currently measured and when, did these align with the ICHOM minimum, if not how did they differ, and would they recommend modified or additional outcomes?. RESULTS: For some disciplines participants agreed with the ICHOM minimums but urged for earlier and more frequent intervention. Some clinicians felt that some of the ICHOM standards were compatible but that different ages were preferred and for others the ICHOM standards were acceptable but developmental stages should be preferred to absolute time points. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: Core outcomes for OFC were supported in principle but there are differences between the ICHOM recommendations and the 2002 WHO global consensus. The latter are established in many centres with historical archives of OFC outcome data, and it was concluded that with some modifications ICHOM could be moulded into useful core outcomes data for inter-centre comparisons worldwide. Oxford University Press 2023-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10687512/ /pubmed/37279564 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjad023 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Original Articles
Mossey, Peter A
Lai, Jason
Meazzini, Maria Costanza
Breugem, Corstiaan
Mark, Hans
Mink van der Molen, Aebele B
Persson, Martin
Davies, Gareth
Ozawa, Terumi Okada
Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
title Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
title_full Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
title_fullStr Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
title_full_unstemmed Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
title_short Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
title_sort core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ichom minimum datasets
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37279564
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjad023
work_keys_str_mv AT mosseypetera coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT laijason coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT meazzinimariacostanza coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT breugemcorstiaan coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT markhans coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT minkvandermolenaebeleb coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT perssonmartin coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT daviesgareth coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets
AT ozawaterumiokada coreoutcomesfororofacialcleftsreconcilingtraditionalandichomminimumdatasets