Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Peter A Mossey, Jason Lai, Maria Costanza Meazzini, Corstiaan Breugem, Hans Mark, Aebele B Mink van der Molen, Martin Persson, Gareth Davies, Terumi Okada Ozawa
{"title":"Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets.","authors":"Peter A Mossey, Jason Lai, Maria Costanza Meazzini, Corstiaan Breugem, Hans Mark, Aebele B Mink van der Molen, Martin Persson, Gareth Davies, Terumi Okada Ozawa","doi":"10.1093/ejo/cjad023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective/design/setting: </strong>This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare diseases (ERN CRANIO) and achieve a core outcome set for cleft care providers worldwide.</p><p><strong>Intervention/method: </strong>Five orofacial cleft (OFC) disciplines were identified, within which all of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) outcomes fall. One questionnaire was designed for each discipline and comprised 1. the relevant ICHOM's outcomes within that discipline, and 2. a series of questions targeted to clinicians. What core outcomes are currently measured and when, did these align with the ICHOM minimum, if not how did they differ, and would they recommend modified or additional outcomes?.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For some disciplines participants agreed with the ICHOM minimums but urged for earlier and more frequent intervention. Some clinicians felt that some of the ICHOM standards were compatible but that different ages were preferred and for others the ICHOM standards were acceptable but developmental stages should be preferred to absolute time points.</p><p><strong>Conclusion/implications: </strong>Core outcomes for OFC were supported in principle but there are differences between the ICHOM recommendations and the 2002 WHO global consensus. The latter are established in many centres with historical archives of OFC outcome data, and it was concluded that with some modifications ICHOM could be moulded into useful core outcomes data for inter-centre comparisons worldwide.</p>","PeriodicalId":11989,"journal":{"name":"European journal of orthodontics","volume":" ","pages":"671-679"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687512/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjad023","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective/design/setting: This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare diseases (ERN CRANIO) and achieve a core outcome set for cleft care providers worldwide.

Intervention/method: Five orofacial cleft (OFC) disciplines were identified, within which all of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) outcomes fall. One questionnaire was designed for each discipline and comprised 1. the relevant ICHOM's outcomes within that discipline, and 2. a series of questions targeted to clinicians. What core outcomes are currently measured and when, did these align with the ICHOM minimum, if not how did they differ, and would they recommend modified or additional outcomes?.

Results: For some disciplines participants agreed with the ICHOM minimums but urged for earlier and more frequent intervention. Some clinicians felt that some of the ICHOM standards were compatible but that different ages were preferred and for others the ICHOM standards were acceptable but developmental stages should be preferred to absolute time points.

Conclusion/implications: Core outcomes for OFC were supported in principle but there are differences between the ICHOM recommendations and the 2002 WHO global consensus. The latter are established in many centres with historical archives of OFC outcome data, and it was concluded that with some modifications ICHOM could be moulded into useful core outcomes data for inter-centre comparisons worldwide.

唇腭裂的核心结果:调和传统和ICHOM最小数据集。
目的/设计/背景:本回顾性研究寻求欧洲和巴西领先的唇腭裂中心自愿参与核心结果测量。这项研究的结果将为有关欧洲罕见病参考网络(ERN CRANIO)核心结果共识的辩论提供信息,并为全球唇腭裂护理提供者实现核心结果集。干预/方法:确定了五个口腔面部唇裂(OFC)学科,其中所有国际健康结果测量联盟(ICHOM)的结果都属于这五个学科。每个学科设计一份问卷,由1。icom在该学科内的相关成果;一系列针对临床医生的问题。目前衡量的核心结果是什么,何时,这些结果是否符合ICHOM的最低要求,如果不是,它们有何不同,他们是否会建议修改或增加结果?结果:对于一些学科,参与者同意ICHOM的最低限度,但敦促更早、更频繁地干预。一些临床医生认为,ICHOM的一些标准是兼容的,但不同的年龄是优选的,而对于其他人来说,ICHOM的标准是可以接受的,但发展阶段应优先于绝对时间点。结论/影响:OFC的核心结果原则上得到支持,但ICHOM建议与2002年世卫组织全球共识之间存在差异。后者是在许多中心建立的,具有OFC结果数据的历史档案,结论是,经过一些修改,ICHOM可以被塑造成有用的核心结果数据,用于全球中心间比较。
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
European journal of orthodontics
European journal of orthodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
71
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Orthodontics publishes papers of excellence on all aspects of orthodontics including craniofacial development and growth. The emphasis of the journal is on full research papers. Succinct and carefully prepared papers are favoured in terms of impact as well as readability.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信