Cargando…
Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review
BACKGROUND: Valid and reliable outcome measures are needed to determine and compare treatment results of port wine stain (PWS) studies. Besides, uniformity in outcome measures is crucial to enable inter-study comparisons and meta-analyses. This study aimed to assess the heterogeneity in reported PWS...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7332045/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32614899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235657 |
_version_ | 1783553449386835968 |
---|---|
author | van Raath, M. Ingmar Chohan, Sandeep Wolkerstorfer, Albert van der Horst, Chantal M. A. M. Limpens, Jacqueline Huang, Xuan Ding, Baoyue Storm, Gert van der Hulst, René R. W. J. Heger, Michal |
author_facet | van Raath, M. Ingmar Chohan, Sandeep Wolkerstorfer, Albert van der Horst, Chantal M. A. M. Limpens, Jacqueline Huang, Xuan Ding, Baoyue Storm, Gert van der Hulst, René R. W. J. Heger, Michal |
author_sort | van Raath, M. Ingmar |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Valid and reliable outcome measures are needed to determine and compare treatment results of port wine stain (PWS) studies. Besides, uniformity in outcome measures is crucial to enable inter-study comparisons and meta-analyses. This study aimed to assess the heterogeneity in reported PWS outcome measures by mapping the (clinical) outcome measures currently used in prospective PWS studies. METHODS: OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for prospective PWS studies published from 2005 to May 2020. Interventional studies with a clinical efficacy assessment were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated methodological quality using a modified Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: In total, 85 studies comprising 3,310 patients were included in which 94 clinician/observer-reported clinical efficacy assessments had been performed using 46 different scoring systems. Eighty-one- studies employed a global assessment of PWS appearance/improvement, of which -82% was expressed as percentage improvement and categorized in 26 different scoring systems. A wide variety of other global and multi-item scoring systems was identified. As a result of outcome heterogeneity and insufficient data reporting, only 44% of studies could be directly compared. A minority of studies included patient-reported or objective outcomes. Thirteen studies of good quality were found. CONCLUSION: Clinical PWS outcomes are highly heterogeneous, which hampers study comparisons and meta-analyses. Consensus-based development of a core outcome-set would benefit future research and clinical practice, especially considering the lack of high-quality trials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7332045 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73320452020-07-15 Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review van Raath, M. Ingmar Chohan, Sandeep Wolkerstorfer, Albert van der Horst, Chantal M. A. M. Limpens, Jacqueline Huang, Xuan Ding, Baoyue Storm, Gert van der Hulst, René R. W. J. Heger, Michal PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Valid and reliable outcome measures are needed to determine and compare treatment results of port wine stain (PWS) studies. Besides, uniformity in outcome measures is crucial to enable inter-study comparisons and meta-analyses. This study aimed to assess the heterogeneity in reported PWS outcome measures by mapping the (clinical) outcome measures currently used in prospective PWS studies. METHODS: OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for prospective PWS studies published from 2005 to May 2020. Interventional studies with a clinical efficacy assessment were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated methodological quality using a modified Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: In total, 85 studies comprising 3,310 patients were included in which 94 clinician/observer-reported clinical efficacy assessments had been performed using 46 different scoring systems. Eighty-one- studies employed a global assessment of PWS appearance/improvement, of which -82% was expressed as percentage improvement and categorized in 26 different scoring systems. A wide variety of other global and multi-item scoring systems was identified. As a result of outcome heterogeneity and insufficient data reporting, only 44% of studies could be directly compared. A minority of studies included patient-reported or objective outcomes. Thirteen studies of good quality were found. CONCLUSION: Clinical PWS outcomes are highly heterogeneous, which hampers study comparisons and meta-analyses. Consensus-based development of a core outcome-set would benefit future research and clinical practice, especially considering the lack of high-quality trials. Public Library of Science 2020-07-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7332045/ /pubmed/32614899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235657 Text en © 2020 van Raath et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article van Raath, M. Ingmar Chohan, Sandeep Wolkerstorfer, Albert van der Horst, Chantal M. A. M. Limpens, Jacqueline Huang, Xuan Ding, Baoyue Storm, Gert van der Hulst, René R. W. J. Heger, Michal Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review |
title | Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review |
title_full | Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review |
title_short | Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review |
title_sort | clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: a systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7332045/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32614899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235657 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanraathmingmar clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT chohansandeep clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT wolkerstorferalbert clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT vanderhorstchantalmam clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT limpensjacqueline clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT huangxuan clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT dingbaoyue clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT stormgert clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT vanderhulstrenerwj clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview AT hegermichal clinicaloutcomemeasuresandscoringsystemsusedinprospectivestudiesofportwinestainsasystematicreview |