Cargando…
Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study
OBJECTIVE: To develop international consensus on the definition and measurement of multimorbidity in research. DESIGN: Delphi consensus study. SETTING: International consensus; data collected in three online rounds from participants between 30 November 2020 and 18 May 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Professiona...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36936594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000247 |
_version_ | 1784899571712786432 |
---|---|
author | Ho, Iris S S Azcoaga-Lorenzo, Amaya Akbari, Ashley Davies, Jim Khunti, Kamlesh Kadam, Umesh T Lyons, Ronan A McCowan, Colin Mercer, Stewart W Nirantharakumar, Krishnarajah Staniszewska, Sophie Guthrie, Bruce |
author_facet | Ho, Iris S S Azcoaga-Lorenzo, Amaya Akbari, Ashley Davies, Jim Khunti, Kamlesh Kadam, Umesh T Lyons, Ronan A McCowan, Colin Mercer, Stewart W Nirantharakumar, Krishnarajah Staniszewska, Sophie Guthrie, Bruce |
author_sort | Ho, Iris S S |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To develop international consensus on the definition and measurement of multimorbidity in research. DESIGN: Delphi consensus study. SETTING: International consensus; data collected in three online rounds from participants between 30 November 2020 and 18 May 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Professionals interested in multimorbidity and people with long term conditions were recruited to professional and public panels. RESULTS: 150 professional and 25 public participants completed the first survey round. Response rates for rounds 2/3 were 83%/92% for professionals and 88%/93% in the public panel, respectively. Across both panels, the consensus was that multimorbidity should be defined as two or more long term conditions. Complex multimorbidity was perceived to be a useful concept, but the panels were unable to agree on how to define it. Both panels agreed that conditions should be included in a multimorbidity measure if they were one or more of the following: currently active; permanent in their effects; requiring current treatment, care, or therapy; requiring surveillance; or relapsing-remitting conditions requiring ongoing care. Consensus was reached for 24 conditions to always include in multimorbidity measures, and 35 conditions to usually include unless a good reason not to existed. Simple counts were preferred for estimating prevalence and examining clustering or trajectories, and weighted measures were preferred for risk adjustment and outcome prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Previous multimorbidity research is limited by inconsistent definitions and approaches to measuring multimorbidity. This Delphi study identifies professional and public panel consensus guidance to facilitate consistency of definition and measurement, and to improve study comparability and reproducibility. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9978673 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99786732023-03-16 Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study Ho, Iris S S Azcoaga-Lorenzo, Amaya Akbari, Ashley Davies, Jim Khunti, Kamlesh Kadam, Umesh T Lyons, Ronan A McCowan, Colin Mercer, Stewart W Nirantharakumar, Krishnarajah Staniszewska, Sophie Guthrie, Bruce BMJ Med Research OBJECTIVE: To develop international consensus on the definition and measurement of multimorbidity in research. DESIGN: Delphi consensus study. SETTING: International consensus; data collected in three online rounds from participants between 30 November 2020 and 18 May 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Professionals interested in multimorbidity and people with long term conditions were recruited to professional and public panels. RESULTS: 150 professional and 25 public participants completed the first survey round. Response rates for rounds 2/3 were 83%/92% for professionals and 88%/93% in the public panel, respectively. Across both panels, the consensus was that multimorbidity should be defined as two or more long term conditions. Complex multimorbidity was perceived to be a useful concept, but the panels were unable to agree on how to define it. Both panels agreed that conditions should be included in a multimorbidity measure if they were one or more of the following: currently active; permanent in their effects; requiring current treatment, care, or therapy; requiring surveillance; or relapsing-remitting conditions requiring ongoing care. Consensus was reached for 24 conditions to always include in multimorbidity measures, and 35 conditions to usually include unless a good reason not to existed. Simple counts were preferred for estimating prevalence and examining clustering or trajectories, and weighted measures were preferred for risk adjustment and outcome prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Previous multimorbidity research is limited by inconsistent definitions and approaches to measuring multimorbidity. This Delphi study identifies professional and public panel consensus guidance to facilitate consistency of definition and measurement, and to improve study comparability and reproducibility. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9978673/ /pubmed/36936594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000247 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Ho, Iris S S Azcoaga-Lorenzo, Amaya Akbari, Ashley Davies, Jim Khunti, Kamlesh Kadam, Umesh T Lyons, Ronan A McCowan, Colin Mercer, Stewart W Nirantharakumar, Krishnarajah Staniszewska, Sophie Guthrie, Bruce Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study |
title | Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study |
title_full | Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study |
title_fullStr | Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study |
title_full_unstemmed | Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study |
title_short | Measuring multimorbidity in research: Delphi consensus study |
title_sort | measuring multimorbidity in research: delphi consensus study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36936594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000247 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hoirisss measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT azcoagalorenzoamaya measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT akbariashley measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT daviesjim measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT khuntikamlesh measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT kadamumesht measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT lyonsronana measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT mccowancolin measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT mercerstewartw measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT nirantharakumarkrishnarajah measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT staniszewskasophie measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy AT guthriebruce measuringmultimorbidityinresearchdelphiconsensusstudy |