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
  • [11] New methods for an update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research
    Gargon, Elizabeth
    Gorst, Sarah
    Norman, Christopher
    Leeflang, Mariska
    Neveol, Aurelie
    Williamson, Paula
    TRIALS, 2019, 20
  • [12] Living with a tracheostomy in MND: A qualitative review of patient and carer perspective
    Young, Rebecca
    Bhopal, Syme
    Gitlin-Leigh, Guy
    Ghosh, Dipansu
    Ting, Julian
    EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2021, 58
  • [13] The Key Role of Patient Involvement in the Development of Core Outcome Sets in Prostate Cancer
    Beyer, Katharina
    MacLennan, Sara J.
    Moris, Lisa
    Lardas, Michael
    Mastris, Ken
    Hooker, Gary
    Greene, Robert
    Briers, Erik
    Omar, Muhammad Imran
    Healey, Jemma
    Tripathee, Sheela
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Venderbos, Lionne D. F.
    Smith, Emma J.
    Bjorkqvist, Josefine
    Asiimwe, Alex
    Huber, Johannes
    Roobol, Monique J.
    Zong, Jihong
    Bjartell, Anders
    N'Dow, James
    Briganti, Alberto
    MacLennan, Steven
    Van Hemelrijck, Mieke
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2021, 7 (05): : 943 - 946
  • [14] Synthesizing Core Outcome Sets for outcomes research in cohort studies: a systematic review
    Musgrove, Erica
    Gasparini, Loretta
    McBain, Katie
    Clifford, Susan A.
    Carter, Simon A.
    Teede, Helena
    Wake, Melissa
    PEDIATRIC RESEARCH, 2022, 92 (04) : 936 - 945
  • [15] Synthesizing Core Outcome Sets for outcomes research in cohort studies: a systematic review
    Erica Musgrove
    Loretta Gasparini
    Katie McBain
    Susan A. Clifford
    Simon A. Carter
    Helena Teede
    Melissa Wake
    Pediatric Research, 2022, 92 : 936 - 945
  • [16] Core outcome sets for research and clinical practice
    Chiarotto, Alessandro
    Ostelo, Raymond W.
    Turk, Dennis C.
    Buchbinder, Rachelle
    Boers, Maarten
    BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2017, 21 (02) : 77 - 84
  • [17] Qualitative systematic reviews to increase the volume and diversity of patient perspectives included in the development of core outcome sets. Tuberculosis: a pilot study
    Hoppe, Lucy Elizabeth
    TRIALS, 2015, 16
  • [18] Qualitative systematic reviews to increase the volume and diversity of patient perspectives included in the development of core outcome sets. Tuberculosis: a pilot study
    Lucy Elizabeth Hoppe
    Trials, 16
  • [19] CORE OUTCOME SETS AND DENTAL PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES
    Lamont, Thomas J.
    Clarkson, Jan E.
    JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED DENTAL PRACTICE, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [20] The use of qualitative methods to inform Delphi surveys in core outcome set development
    T. Keeley
    P. Williamson
    P. Callery
    L. L. Jones
    J. Mathers
    J. Jones
    B. Young
    M. Calvert
    Trials, 17