scholarly journals Synthesis and summary of patient‐reported outcome measures to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. K. McNair ◽  
R. N. Whistance ◽  
R. O. Forsythe ◽  
J. Rees ◽  
J. E. Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals The development of a colorectal cancer surgery core outcome set

Trials ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
AGK McNair ◽  
RN Whistance ◽  
RO Forsythe ◽  
R Macefield ◽  
J Rees ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Outcome Set

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Colorectal Surgery: Construction of Core Measures Using Open-Source Research Method

2021 ◽  
pp. 155335062199887
Author(s):  
Alaa El-Hussuna ◽  
Ines Rubio-Perez ◽  
Monica Millan ◽  
Gianluca Pellino ◽  
Ionut Negoi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Eortc Qlq

Purpose. The primary aim of the study was to review the existing literature about patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in colorectal cancer and IBD. The secondary aim was to present a road map to develop a core outcome set via opinion gathering using social media. Method. This study is the first step of a three-step project aimed at constructing simple, applicable PROMs in colorectal surgery. This article was written in a collaborative manner with authors invited both through Twitter via the #OpenSourceResearch hashtag. The 5 most used PROMs were presented and discussed as slides/images on Twitter. Inputs from a wide spectrum of participants including researchers, surgeons, physicians, nurses, patients, and patients’ organizations were collected and analyzed. The final draft was emailed to all contributors and 6 patients’ representatives for proofreading and approval. Results. Five PROM sets were identified and discussed: EORTC QLQ-CR29, IBDQ short health questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30, ED-Q5-5L, and Short Form-36. There were 315 tweets posted by 50 tweeters with 1458 retweets. Awareness about PROMs was generally limited. The general psycho-physical well-being score (GPP) was suggested and discussed, and then a survey was conducted in which more than 2/3 of voters agreed that GPP covers the most important aspects in PROMs. Conclusion. Despite the limitations of this exploratory study, it offered a new method to conduct clinical research with opportunity to engage patients. The general psycho-physical well-being score suggested as simple, applicable PROMs to be eventually combined procedure-specific, disease-specific, or symptom-specific PROMs if needed.

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcome Measures May Add Value in Breast Cancer Surgery

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 3563-3571 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Lagendijk ◽  
L. S. E. van Egdom ◽  
F. E. E. van Veen ◽  
E. L. Vos ◽  
M. A. M. Mureau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Breast Cancer Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals What is the effect of patient-reported outcome (PRO) item order on prioritisation of PROs in the development of a core outcome set?

Trials ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (S2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katy Chalmers ◽  
Kerry Avery ◽  
Karen Coulman ◽  
Natalie Blencowe ◽  
Rhiannon Macefield ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Item Order ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Patient Reported

Understanding patient-reported outcome measures in colorectal cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 1135-1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Besson ◽  
Irene Deftereos ◽  
Steven Chan ◽  
Ian G Faragher ◽  
Rita Kinsella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Identification and categorisation of relevant outcomes for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease: in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e045568
Author(s):  
Moira Cruickshank ◽  
Rumana Newlands ◽  
Jane Blazeby ◽  
Irfan Ahmed ◽  
Mohamed Bekheit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Core Outcome Set ◽  
Gallstone Disease ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Systematic Map ◽  
Specific Patient ◽  
Outcome Set ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported

BackgroundMany completed trials of interventions for uncomplicated gallstone disease are not as helpful as they could be due to lack of standardisation across studies, outcome definition, collection and reporting. This heterogeneity of outcomes across studies hampers useful synthesis of primary studies and ultimately negatively impacts on decision making by all stakeholders. Core outcome sets offer a potential solution to this problem of heterogeneity and concerns over whether the ‘right’ outcomes are being measured. One of the first steps in core outcome set generation is to identify the range of outcomes reported (in the literature or by patients directly) that are considered important.ObjectivesTo develop a systematic map that examines the variation in outcome reporting of interventions for uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease, and to identify other outcomes of importance to patients with gallstones not previously measured or reported in interventional studies.ResultsThe literature search identified 794 potentially relevant titles and abstracts of which 137 were deemed eligible for inclusion. A total of 129 randomised controlled trials, 4 gallstone disease specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and 8 qualitative studies were included. This was supplemented with data from 6 individual interviews, 1 focus group (n=5 participants) and analysis of 20 consultations. A total of 386 individual recorded outcomes were identified across the combined evidence: 330 outcomes (which were reported 1147 times) from trials evaluating interventions, 22 outcomes from PROMs, 17 outcomes from existing qualitative studies and 17 outcomes from primary qualitative research. Areas of overlap between the evidence sources existed but also the primary research contributed new, unreported in this context, outcomes.ConclusionsThis study took a rigorous approach to catalogue and map the outcomes of importance in gallstone disease to enhance the development of the COS ‘long’ list. A COS for uncomplicated gallstone disease that considers the views of all relevant stakeholders is needed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document