Esther T van der Werf, Rachel Perry, Thomas Ostermann, Henrik Szőke, Alyson L Huntley
{"title":"初级和社区护理研究急性中耳炎(COS-AOM)的核心结局。","authors":"Esther T van der Werf, Rachel Perry, Thomas Ostermann, Henrik Szőke, Alyson L Huntley","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02821-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Outcome heterogeneity reported in Acute Otitis Media (AOM) research hinders evidence accumulation. Identification of a Core Outcome Set (COS) to report on in future studies in AOM is warranted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Phase 1: Candidate outcomes identification by reviewing previously reported outcomes in systematic reviews of AOM. Phase 2: In a Parent and Public Involvement (PPI) meeting candidate outcomes were discussed on their importance, presence, and absence. Phase 3: The clinical perspective of health professionals and pharmacists was anonymously gained through a ranking task. Phase 4: An International Steering Committee (ISC) discussed the ranked outcomes and advised on the final COS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>51 candidate outcomes were identified from 3 reviews and summarised to 20 overarching outcomes in Phase 1. Eight parents participated in the PPI meeting. 28 participants (11 GPs, 11 Traditional Complementary and Integrative medicine (TCIM) Professionals, 6 Pharmacists) ranked the 20 outcome cards. Moderate agreement in ranking was reached within all 3 medical groups, with pharmacists showing the highest agreement (0.540) and the TCIM professionals the lowest (0.421). Correlation coefficients between the groups show a sufficiently high agreement (P < 0.01). The ICS confirmed the final COS-AOM including 8 acute outcomes and 2 mid-long-term outcomes. Agreement for each outcome was reached with 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The proposed COS defines a minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported in primary care and community studies on AOM, including TCIM clinical trials, to enhance evidence-based knowledge. Future research should focus on validating commonly used measurement tools for these outcomes and enhancing findings' generalisability beyond the UK, Europe and primary care settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036145/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A core outcome set for acute otitis media (COS-AOM) for primary and community care studies.\",\"authors\":\"Esther T van der Werf, Rachel Perry, Thomas Ostermann, Henrik Szőke, Alyson L Huntley\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12875-025-02821-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Outcome heterogeneity reported in Acute Otitis Media (AOM) research hinders evidence accumulation. Identification of a Core Outcome Set (COS) to report on in future studies in AOM is warranted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Phase 1: Candidate outcomes identification by reviewing previously reported outcomes in systematic reviews of AOM. Phase 2: In a Parent and Public Involvement (PPI) meeting candidate outcomes were discussed on their importance, presence, and absence. Phase 3: The clinical perspective of health professionals and pharmacists was anonymously gained through a ranking task. Phase 4: An International Steering Committee (ISC) discussed the ranked outcomes and advised on the final COS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>51 candidate outcomes were identified from 3 reviews and summarised to 20 overarching outcomes in Phase 1. Eight parents participated in the PPI meeting. 28 participants (11 GPs, 11 Traditional Complementary and Integrative medicine (TCIM) Professionals, 6 Pharmacists) ranked the 20 outcome cards. Moderate agreement in ranking was reached within all 3 medical groups, with pharmacists showing the highest agreement (0.540) and the TCIM professionals the lowest (0.421). Correlation coefficients between the groups show a sufficiently high agreement (P < 0.01). The ICS confirmed the final COS-AOM including 8 acute outcomes and 2 mid-long-term outcomes. Agreement for each outcome was reached with 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The proposed COS defines a minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported in primary care and community studies on AOM, including TCIM clinical trials, to enhance evidence-based knowledge. Future research should focus on validating commonly used measurement tools for these outcomes and enhancing findings' generalisability beyond the UK, Europe and primary care settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC primary care\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036145/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC primary care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02821-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02821-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
A core outcome set for acute otitis media (COS-AOM) for primary and community care studies.
Background and objective: Outcome heterogeneity reported in Acute Otitis Media (AOM) research hinders evidence accumulation. Identification of a Core Outcome Set (COS) to report on in future studies in AOM is warranted.
Methods: Phase 1: Candidate outcomes identification by reviewing previously reported outcomes in systematic reviews of AOM. Phase 2: In a Parent and Public Involvement (PPI) meeting candidate outcomes were discussed on their importance, presence, and absence. Phase 3: The clinical perspective of health professionals and pharmacists was anonymously gained through a ranking task. Phase 4: An International Steering Committee (ISC) discussed the ranked outcomes and advised on the final COS.
Results: 51 candidate outcomes were identified from 3 reviews and summarised to 20 overarching outcomes in Phase 1. Eight parents participated in the PPI meeting. 28 participants (11 GPs, 11 Traditional Complementary and Integrative medicine (TCIM) Professionals, 6 Pharmacists) ranked the 20 outcome cards. Moderate agreement in ranking was reached within all 3 medical groups, with pharmacists showing the highest agreement (0.540) and the TCIM professionals the lowest (0.421). Correlation coefficients between the groups show a sufficiently high agreement (P < 0.01). The ICS confirmed the final COS-AOM including 8 acute outcomes and 2 mid-long-term outcomes. Agreement for each outcome was reached with 100%.
Conclusion: The proposed COS defines a minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported in primary care and community studies on AOM, including TCIM clinical trials, to enhance evidence-based knowledge. Future research should focus on validating commonly used measurement tools for these outcomes and enhancing findings' generalisability beyond the UK, Europe and primary care settings.