Children's and caregivers' participation in the development of paediatric core outcome sets: a cross-sectional analysis.

IF 7.6 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ruobing Lei, Janne Estill, Haiyun Wang, Jin Xiong, Qiu Li, Yaolong Chen, Paula Williamson
{"title":"Children's and caregivers' participation in the development of paediatric core outcome sets: a cross-sectional analysis.","authors":"Ruobing Lei, Janne Estill, Haiyun Wang, Jin Xiong, Qiu Li, Yaolong Chen, Paula Williamson","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aims to address the status of children's and caregivers' participation in the development of paediatric core outcome sets (COS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included all paediatric COS from a previous systematic review and searched the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials database to 26 February 2024 for recent paediatric COS. We used descriptive and thematic analysis methods to present the characteristics of the included COS and to describe children's and caregivers' participation in the development, including any facilitators and barriers. We assessed the degree of participation of children and caregivers in two steps: by rating whether their views were considered in forming the outcome list (yes/no) and then whether their views were integrated in determining the most important outcomes (fully integrated/partially integrated/not integrated).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 114 paediatric COS were included. 60 (53%) COS involved children and caregivers in the development process. 29 (48%) of the 60 COS considered children's and caregivers' views in forming the initial outcome list, which was most often conducted by interview (n=12 of 29, 41%). Regarding determining the most important outcomes, 35 (58%) of the 60 COS fully integrated children's and caregivers' views, and the most common method was the Delphi survey with consensus meeting (n=29 of 35, 83%); the youngest child participants were aged 7 years. The most frequently mentioned facilitator of children's and caregivers' participation was the engagement of patient groups or organisations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>We evaluated the degree of children's and caregivers' participation in the development of COS and found that strategies to promote children's and caregivers' participation should be constructed.</p>","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113521","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to address the status of children's and caregivers' participation in the development of paediatric core outcome sets (COS).

Methods: We included all paediatric COS from a previous systematic review and searched the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials database to 26 February 2024 for recent paediatric COS. We used descriptive and thematic analysis methods to present the characteristics of the included COS and to describe children's and caregivers' participation in the development, including any facilitators and barriers. We assessed the degree of participation of children and caregivers in two steps: by rating whether their views were considered in forming the outcome list (yes/no) and then whether their views were integrated in determining the most important outcomes (fully integrated/partially integrated/not integrated).

Results: A total of 114 paediatric COS were included. 60 (53%) COS involved children and caregivers in the development process. 29 (48%) of the 60 COS considered children's and caregivers' views in forming the initial outcome list, which was most often conducted by interview (n=12 of 29, 41%). Regarding determining the most important outcomes, 35 (58%) of the 60 COS fully integrated children's and caregivers' views, and the most common method was the Delphi survey with consensus meeting (n=29 of 35, 83%); the youngest child participants were aged 7 years. The most frequently mentioned facilitator of children's and caregivers' participation was the engagement of patient groups or organisations.

Conclusion and relevance: We evaluated the degree of children's and caregivers' participation in the development of COS and found that strategies to promote children's and caregivers' participation should be constructed.

儿童和照顾者参与儿科核心结局集的发展:横断面分析。
目的:本研究旨在探讨儿童和照顾者参与儿科核心结局集(COS)发展的现状。方法:我们从之前的系统评价中纳入了所有儿科COS,并在有效性试验数据库中检索了核心结局指标,以查找到2024年2月26日的近期儿科COS。我们使用描述性和专题分析方法来呈现纳入的COS的特征,并描述儿童和照顾者在发展中的参与情况,包括任何促进因素和障碍。我们通过两个步骤评估儿童和照顾者的参与程度:通过评估在形成结果列表时是否考虑了他们的观点(是/否),然后在确定最重要的结果时是否综合了他们的观点(完全综合/部分综合/不综合)。结果:共纳入114例小儿COS。60例(53%)COS涉及儿童和照顾者在发展过程中。60名COS中有29名(48%)在形成初步结果清单时考虑了儿童和照顾者的意见,这通常是通过访谈进行的(n=12 / 29, 41%)。在确定最重要的结果方面,60名COS中有35名(58%)充分整合了儿童和照顾者的观点,最常见的方法是德尔菲调查,意见一致(n=29 / 35, 83%);最小的儿童参与者年龄为7岁。最常提到的促进儿童和照顾者参与的因素是患者团体或组织的参与。结论及相关性:我们评估了儿童和照顾者对COS发展的参与程度,发现需要构建促进儿童和照顾者参与的策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (BMJ EBM) publishes original evidence-based research, insights and opinions on what matters for health care. We focus on the tools, methods, and concepts that are basic and central to practising evidence-based medicine and deliver relevant, trustworthy and impactful evidence. BMJ EBM is a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal and adheres to the highest possible industry standards for editorial policies and publication ethics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信