A review of patient and carer participation and the use of qualitative research in the development of core outcome sets

被引:31
|
作者
Jones, Janet E. [1 ]
Jones, Laura L. [1 ]
Keeley, Thomas J. H. [2 ]
Calvert, Melanie J. [1 ]
Mathers, Jonathan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Coll Med & Dent Sci, Inst Appl Hlth Res, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[2] Parexel Int, Evergreen Bldg, London, England
来源
PLOS ONE | 2017年 / 12卷 / 03期
关键词
CLINICAL-TRIALS; CONSENSUS STATEMENT; HAND OSTEOARTHRITIS; HEALTH OUTCOMES; ATOPIC ECZEMA; DOMAINS; PERSPECTIVE; FIBROMYALGIA; CHILDREN; BENEFITS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0172937
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background To be meaningful, a core outcome set (COS) should be relevant to all stakeholders including patients and carers. This review aimed to explore the methods by which patients and carers have been included as participants in COS development exercises and, in particular, the use and reporting of qualitative methods. Methods In August 2015, a search of the Core Outcomes Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database was undertaken to identify papers involving patients and carers in COS develop-ment. Data were extracted to identify the data collection methods used in COS development, the number of health professionals, patients and carers participating in these, and the reported details of qualitative research undertaken. Results Fifty-nine papers reporting patient and carer participation were included in the review, ten of which reported using qualitative methods. Although patients and carers participated in out-come elicitation for inclusion in COS processes, health professionals tended to dominate the prioritisation exercises. Of the ten qualitative papers, only three were reported as a clear pre-designed part of a COS process. Qualitative data were collected using interviews, focus groups or a combination of these. None of the qualitative papers reported an underpinning methodological framework and details regarding data saturation, reflexivity and resource use associated with data collection were often poorly reported. Five papers reported difficulty in achieving a diverse sample of participants and two reported that a large and varied range of outcomes were often identified by participants making subsequent rating and rank-ing difficult. Conclusions Consideration of the best way to include patients and carers throughout the COS develop-ment process is needed. Additionally, further work is required to assess the potential role of qualitative methods in COS, to explore the knowledge produced by different qualitative data collection methods, and to evaluate the time and resources required to incorporate qualitative methods into COS development.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Patient participation impacts outcome domain selection in core outcome sets for research: an updated systematic review
    Dodd, Susanna
    Gorst, Sarah L.
    Young, Amber
    Lucas, Samuel W.
    Williamson, Paula R.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 158 : 127 - 133
  • [2] Patient participation in Delphi surveys to develop core outcome sets: systematic review
    Barrington, Heather
    Young, Bridget
    Williamson, Paula R.
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (09):
  • [3] Core outcome sets (COS) and the core outcome measures in effectiveness trials (COMET) initiative: patient participation in COS development
    Williamson, Paula
    Gargon, Elizabeth
    Gorst, Sarah
    Altman, Doug
    Blazeby, Jane
    Clarke, Mike
    Tunis, Sean
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2016, 25 : 68 - 68
  • [4] Development of core outcome sets for both research and care
    Kearney, Anna
    Dodd, Susanna
    Williamson, Paula R.
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2023, 102 (07) : 960 - 960
  • [5] A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies on pelvic organ prolapse for the development of core outcome sets
    Rada, M. P.
    Jones, S.
    Falconi, G.
    Milhem Haddad, J.
    Betschart, C.
    Pergialiotis, V
    Doumouchtsis, S.
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2020, 31 (SUPPL 1) : S67 - S68
  • [6] A systematic review of studies reporting the development of core outcome sets for use in routine care
    Kearney, Anna
    Gargon, Elizabeth
    Mitchell, James W.
    Callaghan, Stephen
    Yameen, Farheen
    Williamson, Paula R.
    Dodd, Susanna
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 158 : 34 - 43
  • [7] Patient and carer involvement in palliative care research: An integrative qualitative evidence synthesis review
    Chambers, Eleni
    Gardiner, Clare
    Thompson, Jill
    Seymour, Jane
    PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2019, 33 (08) : 969 - 984
  • [8] A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies on pelvic organ prolapse for the development of core outcome sets
    Rada, Maria Patricia
    Jones, Stephanie
    Falconi, Gabriele
    Haddad, Jorge Milhem
    Betschart, Cornelia
    Pergialiotis, Vasilios
    Doumouchtsis, Stergios K.
    NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS, 2020, 39 (03) : 880 - 889
  • [9] Patient involvement vs. patient participation in qualitative research in the development of PROMs
    Blackburn, Steven J.
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2017, 20 (03) : 371 - 372
  • [10] Core outcome sets in medical research
    Kirkham, Jamie J.
    Williamson, Paula
    BMJ MEDICINE, 2022, 1 (01):