22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COS-COVID)

      research-article
      a , b , , a , b , , a , b , * , c , d , e , f , f , e , e , g , h , i , j , k , l , m , b , n , e , o , p , a , b , a , b , a , b , a , b , a , b , a , q , b , n , r , s , t , u , b , n , a , q , *
      Engineering (Beijing, China)
      Higher Education Press
      Core outcome set, COVID-19, 2019-nCoV, Coronavirus disease, Clinical trials

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Since its outbreak in December 2019, a series of clinical trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been registered or carried out. However, the significant heterogeneity and less critical outcomes of such trials may be leading to a waste of research resources. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials on COVID-19 in order to tackle the outcome issues. The study was conducted according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) handbook (version 1.0), a guideline for COS development. A research group was set up that included experts in respiratory and critical medicine, traditional Chinese medicine, evidence-based medicine, clinical pharmacology, and statistics, in addition to medical journal editors. Clinical trial registry websites (chictr.org.cn and clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to retrieve clinical trial protocols and outcomes in order to form an outcome pool. A total of 78 clinical trial protocols on COVID-19 were included and 259 outcomes were collected. After standardization, 132 outcomes were identified within seven different categories, of which 58 were selected to develop a preliminary outcome list for further consensus. After two rounds of Delphi survey and one consensus meeting, the most important outcomes for the different clinical classifications of COVID-19 were identified and determined to constitute the COS for clinical trials on COVID-19 (COS-COVID). The COS-COVID includes one outcome for the mild type (time to 2019-nCoV reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity), four outcomes for the ordinary type (length of hospital stay, composite events, score of clinical symptoms, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), five outcomes for the severe type (composite events, length of hospital stay, arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO 2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2), duration of mechanical ventilation, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), one outcome for critical type (all-cause mortality), and one outcome for rehabilitation period (pulmonary function). The COS-COVID is currently the most valuable and practical clinical outcome set for the evaluation of intervention effect, and is useful for evidence assessment and decision-making. With a deepening understanding of COVID-19 and application feedback, the COS-COVID should be continuously updated.

          Related collections

          Most cited references3

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations

          Background The use of core outcome sets (COS) ensures that researchers measure and report those outcomes that are most likely to be relevant to users of their research. Several hundred COS projects have been systematically identified to date, but there has been no formal quality assessment of these studies. The Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development (COS-STAD) project aimed to identify minimum standards for the design of a COS study agreed upon by an international group, while other specific guidance exists for the final reporting of COS development studies (Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting [COS-STAR]). Methods and findings An international group of experienced COS developers, methodologists, journal editors, potential users of COS (clinical trialists, systematic reviewers, and clinical guideline developers), and patient representatives produced the COS-STAD recommendations to help improve the quality of COS development and support the assessment of whether a COS had been developed using a reasonable approach. An open survey of experts generated an initial list of items, which was refined by a 2-round Delphi survey involving nearly 250 participants representing key stakeholder groups. Participants assigned importance ratings for each item using a 1–9 scale. Consensus that an item should be included in the set of minimum standards was defined as at least 70% of the voting participants from each stakeholder group providing a score between 7 and 9. The Delphi survey was followed by a consensus discussion with the study management group representing multiple stakeholder groups. COS-STAD contains 11 minimum standards that are the minimum design recommendations for all COS development projects. The recommendations focus on 3 key domains: the scope, the stakeholders, and the consensus process. Conclusions The COS-STAD project has established 11 minimum standards to be followed by COS developers when planning their projects and by users when deciding whether a COS has been developed using reasonable methods.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Core Outcome Set-STAndardised Protocol Items: the COS-STAP Statement

            Background Several hundred core outcome set (COS) projects have been systematically identified to date which, if adopted, ensure that researchers measure and report those outcomes that are most likely to be relevant to users of their research. The uptake of a COS by COS users will depend in part on the transparency and robustness of the methods used in the COS development study, which would be increased by the use of a standardised protocol. This article describes the development of the COS-STAP (Core Outcome Set-STAndardised Protocol Items) Statement for the content of a COS development study protocol. Methods The COS-STAP Statement was developed following the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency Of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network’s methodological framework for guideline development. This included an initial item generation stage, a two-round Delphi survey involving more than 150 participants representing three stakeholder groups (COS developers, journal editors and patient and public involvement researchers interested in COS development), followed by a consensus meeting with eight voting participants. Results The COS-STAP Statement consists of a checklist of 13 items considered essential documentation in a protocol, outlining the scope of the COS, stakeholder involvement, COS development plans and consensus processes. Conclusions Journal editors and peer reviewers can use the guidance to assess the completeness of a COS development study protocol submitted for publication. By providing guidance for key content, the COS-STAP Statement will enhance the drafting of high-quality protocols and determine how the COS development study will be carried out. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3230-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Approach to Developing Core Outcome Sets for Clinical Trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Engineering (Beijing)
                Engineering (Beijing)
                Engineering (Beijing, China)
                Higher Education Press
                2095-8099
                2096-0026
                18 March 2020
                18 March 2020
                :
                Affiliations
                [a ]Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 301617, China
                [b ]Chinese Clinical Trials Core Outcome Set Research Center, Tianjin 301617, China
                [c ]Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100010, China
                [d ]The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510405, China
                [e ]The Second Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300150, China
                [f ]The First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300201, China
                [g ]Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome 00161, Italy
                [h ]University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK
                [i ]Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon 34054, Republic of Korea
                [j ]Shuguang Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200120, China
                [k ]Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100700, China
                [l ]Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 610075, China
                [m ]Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100091, China
                [n ]The Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
                [o ]The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China
                [p ]Suqian People’s Hospital of Nanjing Drum-Tower Hospital Group, Suqian 223800, China
                [q ]Tianjin State Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 301617, China
                [r ]Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
                [s ]The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou 450099, China
                [t ]Institute of Basic Theory for Chinese Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medicine Science, Beijing 100700, China
                [u ]Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China
                Author notes
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                S2095-8099(20)30042-4
                10.1016/j.eng.2020.03.002
                7102592
                32292626
                8f139855-3358-4480-ba24-68b189fe64b4
                © 2020 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier LTD on behalf of Chinese Academy of Engineering and Higher Education Press Limited Company.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                core outcome set,covid-19,2019-ncov,coronavirus disease,clinical trials

                Comments

                Comment on this article