Cargando…

Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study

OBJECTIVE: To develop a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future abortion randomized controlled trials. STUDY DESIGN: We extracted outcomes from quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews of abortion studies to assess using a modified Delphi method. Via email, we invited resear...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Whitehouse, Katherine C., Stifani, Bianca M., Duffy, James M.N., Kim, Caron R., Creinin, Mitchell D., DePiñeres, Teresa, Winikoff, Beverly, Gemzell-Danielsson, Kristina, Blum, Jennifer, Sherman, Renee Bracey, Lavelanet, Antonella F., Brahmi, Dalia, Grossman, Daniel, Tamang, Anand, Gebreselassie, Hailemichael, Ponce de Leon, Rodolfo Gomez, Ganatra, Bela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8609158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34273335
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2021.07.004
_version_ 1784602871320281088
author Whitehouse, Katherine C.
Stifani, Bianca M.
Duffy, James M.N.
Kim, Caron R.
Creinin, Mitchell D.
DePiñeres, Teresa
Winikoff, Beverly
Gemzell-Danielsson, Kristina
Blum, Jennifer
Sherman, Renee Bracey
Lavelanet, Antonella F.
Brahmi, Dalia
Grossman, Daniel
Tamang, Anand
Gebreselassie, Hailemichael
Ponce de Leon, Rodolfo Gomez
Ganatra, Bela
author_facet Whitehouse, Katherine C.
Stifani, Bianca M.
Duffy, James M.N.
Kim, Caron R.
Creinin, Mitchell D.
DePiñeres, Teresa
Winikoff, Beverly
Gemzell-Danielsson, Kristina
Blum, Jennifer
Sherman, Renee Bracey
Lavelanet, Antonella F.
Brahmi, Dalia
Grossman, Daniel
Tamang, Anand
Gebreselassie, Hailemichael
Ponce de Leon, Rodolfo Gomez
Ganatra, Bela
author_sort Whitehouse, Katherine C.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To develop a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future abortion randomized controlled trials. STUDY DESIGN: We extracted outcomes from quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews of abortion studies to assess using a modified Delphi method. Via email, we invited researchers, clinicians, patients, and healthcare organization representatives with expertise in abortion to rate the importance of the outcomes on a 9-point Likert scale. After 2 rounds, we used descriptive analyses to determine which outcomes met the predefined consensus criteria. We finalized the core outcome set during a series of consensus development meetings. RESULTS: We entered 42 outcomes, organized in 15 domains, into the Delphi survey. Two-hundred eighteen of 251 invitees (87%) provided responses (203 complete responses) for round 1 and 118 of 218 (42%) completed round2. Sixteen experts participated in the development meetings. The final outcome set includes 15 outcomes: 10 outcomes apply to all abortion trials (successful abortion, ongoing pregnancy, death, hemorrhage, uterine infection, hospitalization, surgical intervention, pain, gastrointestinal symptoms, and patients’ experience of abortion); 2 outcomes apply to only surgical abortion trials (uterine perforation and cervical injury), one applies only to medical abortion trials (uterine rupture); and 2 apply to trials evaluating abortions with anesthesia (over-sedation/respiratory depression and local anesthetic systemic toxicity). CONCLUSION: Using robust consensus science methods we have developed a core outcome set for future abortion research. IMPLICATIONS: Standardized outcomes in abortion research could decrease heterogeneity among trials and improve the quality of systematic reviews and clinical guidelines. Researchers should select, collect, and report these core outcomes in future abortion trials. Journal editors should advocate for core outcome set reporting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8609158
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86091582021-11-29 Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study Whitehouse, Katherine C. Stifani, Bianca M. Duffy, James M.N. Kim, Caron R. Creinin, Mitchell D. DePiñeres, Teresa Winikoff, Beverly Gemzell-Danielsson, Kristina Blum, Jennifer Sherman, Renee Bracey Lavelanet, Antonella F. Brahmi, Dalia Grossman, Daniel Tamang, Anand Gebreselassie, Hailemichael Ponce de Leon, Rodolfo Gomez Ganatra, Bela Contraception Original Research Article OBJECTIVE: To develop a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future abortion randomized controlled trials. STUDY DESIGN: We extracted outcomes from quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews of abortion studies to assess using a modified Delphi method. Via email, we invited researchers, clinicians, patients, and healthcare organization representatives with expertise in abortion to rate the importance of the outcomes on a 9-point Likert scale. After 2 rounds, we used descriptive analyses to determine which outcomes met the predefined consensus criteria. We finalized the core outcome set during a series of consensus development meetings. RESULTS: We entered 42 outcomes, organized in 15 domains, into the Delphi survey. Two-hundred eighteen of 251 invitees (87%) provided responses (203 complete responses) for round 1 and 118 of 218 (42%) completed round2. Sixteen experts participated in the development meetings. The final outcome set includes 15 outcomes: 10 outcomes apply to all abortion trials (successful abortion, ongoing pregnancy, death, hemorrhage, uterine infection, hospitalization, surgical intervention, pain, gastrointestinal symptoms, and patients’ experience of abortion); 2 outcomes apply to only surgical abortion trials (uterine perforation and cervical injury), one applies only to medical abortion trials (uterine rupture); and 2 apply to trials evaluating abortions with anesthesia (over-sedation/respiratory depression and local anesthetic systemic toxicity). CONCLUSION: Using robust consensus science methods we have developed a core outcome set for future abortion research. IMPLICATIONS: Standardized outcomes in abortion research could decrease heterogeneity among trials and improve the quality of systematic reviews and clinical guidelines. Researchers should select, collect, and report these core outcomes in future abortion trials. Journal editors should advocate for core outcome set reporting. Elsevier 2021-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8609158/ /pubmed/34273335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2021.07.004 Text en . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Whitehouse, Katherine C.
Stifani, Bianca M.
Duffy, James M.N.
Kim, Caron R.
Creinin, Mitchell D.
DePiñeres, Teresa
Winikoff, Beverly
Gemzell-Danielsson, Kristina
Blum, Jennifer
Sherman, Renee Bracey
Lavelanet, Antonella F.
Brahmi, Dalia
Grossman, Daniel
Tamang, Anand
Gebreselassie, Hailemichael
Ponce de Leon, Rodolfo Gomez
Ganatra, Bela
Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study
title Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study
title_full Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study
title_fullStr Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study
title_full_unstemmed Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study
title_short Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): Results from an international consensus development study
title_sort standardizing abortion research outcomes (star): results from an international consensus development study
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8609158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34273335
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2021.07.004
work_keys_str_mv AT whitehousekatherinec standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT stifanibiancam standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT duffyjamesmn standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT kimcaronr standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT creininmitchelld standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT depineresteresa standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT winikoffbeverly standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT gemzelldanielssonkristina standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT blumjennifer standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT shermanreneebracey standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT lavelanetantonellaf standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT brahmidalia standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT grossmandaniel standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT tamanganand standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT gebreselassiehailemichael standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT poncedeleonrodolfogomez standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy
AT ganatrabela standardizingabortionresearchoutcomesstarresultsfromaninternationalconsensusdevelopmentstudy