Cochrane Reviews and Dermatological Trials Outcome Concordance: Why Core Outcome Sets Could Make Trial Results More Usable
- Schmitt, Jochen
- Lange, Toni
- Kottner, Jan
- Prinsen, Cecilia A. C.
- Weberschock, Tobias
- Hahnel, Elisabeth
- Apfelbacher, Christian
- Brandstetter, Susanne
- Dreher, Andreas
- Stevens, Giles
- Burden-Teh, Esther
- Rogers, Natasha
- Spuls, Phyllis
- Grainge, Matthew J.
- Williams, Hywel C.
- Jacobi, Lena
DOIAbstract
Evidence-based health care requires that relevant outcomes for patients are included in clinical trials investigating treatment effects, allowing subsequent systematic reviews to summarize all relevant evidence to guide clinical practice. Currently, no gold standard of outcome choice for dermatology trials and reviews exists. We systematically assessed concordance between efficacy outcomes in a random sample of 10 Cochrane Skin systematic reviews and the 220 dermatology trials included. Reviews did not include 742 (68%) of the 1,086 trial outcomes. Of the 60 outcomes the reviews sought, 17 (28%) were not reported in any trial, while 12 were assessed in <50% of trials. For 11 of 23 (48%) primary review outcomes, meta-analysis was impossible,...
Add to ORKG