A core outcome set for pre-eclampsia research: an international consensus development study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a core outcome set for pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: Consensus development study. SETTING: International. POPULATION: Two hundred and eight-one healthcare professionals, 41 researchers and 110 patients, representing 56 countries, participated. METHODS: Modified Delphi method and Modified Nominal Group Technique. RESULTS: A long-list of 116 potential core outcomes was developed by combining the outcomes reported in 79 pre-eclampsia trials with those derived from thematic analysis of 30 in-depth interviews of women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia. Forty-seven consensus outcomes were identified from the Delphi process following which 14 maternal and eight offspring core outcomes were agreed at the consensus development meeting. Maternal core outcomes: death, eclampsia, stroke, cortical blindness, retinal detachment, pulmonary oedema, acute kidney injury, liver haematoma or rupture, abruption, postpartum haemorrhage, raised liver enzymes, low platelets, admission to intensive care required, and intubation and ventilation. Offspring core outcomes: stillbirth, gestational age at delivery, birthweight, small-for-gestational-age, neonatal mortality, seizures, admission to neonatal unit required and respiratory support. CONCLUSIONS: The core outcome set for pre-eclampsia should underpin future randomised trials and systematic reviews. Such implementation should ensure that future research holds the necessary reach and relevance to inform clinical practice, enhance women's care and improve the outcomes of pregnant women and their babies. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: 281 healthcare professionals, 41 researchers and 110 women have developed #preeclampsia core outcomes @HOPEoutcomes @jamesmnduffy. [Correction added on 29 June 2020, after first online publication: the order has been corrected.].

A core outcome set for future endometriosis research: an international consensus development study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a core outcome set for endometriosis. DESIGN: Consensus development study. SETTING: International. POPULATION: One hundred and sixteen healthcare professionals, 31 researchers and 206 patient representatives. METHODS: Modified Delphi method and modified nominal group technique. RESULTS: The final core outcome set includes three core outcomes for trials evaluating potential treatments for pain and other symptoms associated with endometriosis: overall pain; improvement in the most troublesome symptom; and quality of life. In addition, eight core outcomes for trials evaluating potential treatments for infertility associated with endometriosis were identified: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound; pregnancy loss, including ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy; live birth; time to pregnancy leading to live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital abnormalities. Two core outcomes applicable to all trials were also identified: adverse events and patient satisfaction with treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Using robust consensus science methods, healthcare professionals, researchers and women with endometriosis have developed a core outcome set to standardise outcome selection, collection and reporting across future randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for endometriosis. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: @coreoutcomes for future #endometriosis research have been developed @jamesmnduffy.

A core outcome set for hyperemesis gravidarum research: an international consensus study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a core outcome set for trials on the treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum (HG). DESIGN: Identification of outcomes is followed by a modified Delphi survey combined with a consensus development meeting and a consultation round. SETTING: An international web-based survey combined with a consensus development meeting. POPULATION: Stakeholders including researchers; women with lived experience of HG and their families; obstetric health professionals; and other health professionals. METHODS: We used systematic review, semi-structured patient interviews, closed group sessions and Steering Committee input to identify potential core outcomes. We conducted two web-based survey rounds, followed by a face-to-face consensus development meeting and a web-based consultation round. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A core outcome set for research on HG. RESULTS: Fifty-six potential outcomes were identified. The modified Delphi process was completed by 125 stakeholders, the consensus development meeting by 20 stakeholders and the consultation round by 96 stakeholders. Consensus was reached in ten domains on 24 outcomes: nausea; vomiting; inability to tolerate oral fluids or food; dehydration; weight difference; electrolyte imbalance; intravenous fluid treatment; use of medication for hyperemesis gravidarum; hospital treatment; treatment compliance; patient satisfaction; daily functioning; maternal physical or mental or emotional wellbeing; short- and long-term adverse effects of treatment; maternal death; pregnancy complications; considering or actually terminating a wanted pregnancy; preterm birth; small for gestational age; congenital anomalies; neonatal morbidity and offspring death). CONCLUSIONS: This core outcome set will help standardise outcome reporting in HG trials. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: A core outcome set for treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum in order to create high-quality evidence.

Research priority setting in women's health: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Developing a shared agenda is an important step in ensuring future research has the necessary relevance. OBJECTIVE: To characterise research priority setting partnerships (PSPs) relevant to women's health. SEARCH STRATEGY: Included studies were identified by searching MEDLINE and the James Lind Alliance (JLA) database. SELECTION CRITERIA: Priority setting partnerships using formal consensus methods. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Descriptive narrative to describe the study characteristics, methods, and results. MAIN RESULTS: Ten national and two international PSPs were identified. All PSPs used the JLA method to identify research priorities. Nine PSPs had published a protocol. Potential research uncertainties were gathered from guidelines (two studies), Cochrane reviews (five studies), and surveys (12 studies). The number of healthcare professionals (31-287), patients (44-932), and others (33-139) who responded to the survey, and the number of uncertainties submitted (52-4767) varied. All PSPs entered confirmed research uncertainties (39-104) into interim priority setting surveys and healthcare professionals (31-287), patients (44-932), and others (33-139) responded. All PSPs entered a short list of research uncertainties into a consensus development meeting, which enabled healthcare professionals (six to 21), patients (eight to 14), and others (two to 13) to identify research priorities (ten to 15). Four PSPs have published their results. CONCLUSION: Future research priority setting studies should publish a protocol, use formal consensus development methods, and ensure their methods and results are comprehensively reported. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Research published in @BJOGtweets highlights future research priorities across women's health, including @FertilityTop10, @jamesmnduffy.

Evaluation of treatments for Bartholin's cyst or abscess: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: No consensus on the management of symptomatic cysts or abscesses of the Bartholin's gland exists. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of surgical interventions for a symptomatic Bartholin's cyst or abscess. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched bibliographical databases from inception to April 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials evaluating a surgical intervention for the treatment of a symptomatic Bartholin's cyst or abscess. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eight trials, reporting data from 699 women, were included. Study characteristics and methodological quality were recorded for each trial. Summary estimates were calculated using random-effects methods. MAIN RESULTS: When considering the recurrence of a symptomatic Bartholin's cyst or abscess, the evidence was consistent with notable effects in either direction (risk ratio [RR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-1.40) when comparing marsupialisation with incision, drainage and insertion of a Word catheter. Limited inference could be made when comparing marsupialisation with incision, drainage and silver nitrate insertion (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.57-1.75), and incision, drainage and cavity closure (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.01-4.89). There was limited reporting of secondary outcomes, including haematoma, infectious morbidity and persistent dyspareunia. CONCLUSIONS: Current randomised trial evidence does not support the use of any single surgical intervention for the treatment of a symptomatic cyst or abscess of the Bartholin's gland. PROSPECTIVE REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42018088553. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Further research is needed to identify an effective treatment for #Bartholin's cyst or abscess. @jamesmnduffy.

Methodological decisions influence the identification of potential core outcomes in studies related to pre-eclampsia: an analysis informing the development of recommendations for future core outcome set developers.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effect of different methodological decisions on the identification of potential core outcomes to inform the development of recommendations for future core coutcome set developers. DESIGN: Mixed methods study. SETTING: A core outcome set for pre-eclampsia was used as an exemplar. SAMPLE: A long list of potential core outcomes was developed by undertaking a systematic review of pre-eclampsia trials and performing a thematic analysis of in-depth patient interviews. METHODS: Specific methods used to generate long lists of potential core outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Different methodological decisions had a substantial impact on the identification of potential core outcomes. Extracting outcomes from published pre-eclampsia trials was an effective way of identifying 48 maternal, eight fetal, 25 neonatal outcomes, and eight patient-reported outcomes. Limiting the extraction of outcomes to primary outcomes or outcomes commonly reported in pre-eclampsia trials reduced the number and diversity of potential core outcomes identified. Thematic analysis of in-depth patient interviews ensured an additional five patient reported outcomes and six outcomes related to future child health were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Future core outcome set developers should use quantitative and qualitative methods when developing a long list of potential core outcomes. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: @OfficialNIHR research published in @BJOGtweets informs new recommendations for future @coreoutcomes developers.

What outcomes should researchers select, collect and report in pre-eclampsia research? A qualitative study exploring the views of women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia.

OBJECTIVE: To identify outcomes relevant to women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. SETTING: A national study conducted in the United Kingdom. SAMPLE: Purposive sample of women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia. METHODS: Thematic analysis of qualitative interview transcripts. RESULTS: Thirty women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia were interviewed. Thematic analysis identified 71 different treatment outcomes. Fifty-nine of these had been previously reported by pre-eclampsia trials. Outcomes related to maternal and neonatal morbidity, commonly reported by pre-eclampsia trials, were frequently discussed by women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia. Twelve outcomes had not been previously reported by pre-eclampsia trials. When compared with published research, it was evident that the outlook of women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia was broader. They considered pre-eclampsia in relation to the 'whole' person and attached special significance to outcomes relating to emotional wellbeing and the future health, development and wellbeing of their offspring. CONCLUSIONS: Selecting, collecting and reporting outcomes relevant to women with pre-eclampsia should ensure that future pre-eclampsia research has the necessary reach and relevance to inform clinical practice. Future core outcome set development studies should use qualitative research methods to ensure that the long list of potential core outcomes holds relevance to patients. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: What do women want? A national study identifies key treatment outcomes for women with pre-eclampsia. Next step: @coreoutcomes for #preeclampsia @NIHR_DC.

Do we need a core outcome set for childbirth perineal trauma research? A systematic review of outcome reporting in randomised trials evaluating the management of childbirth trauma.

BACKGROUND: Selecting appropriate outcomes to reflect both beneficial and harmful effects is a critical step in designing childbirth trauma trials. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes and outcome measures reported in randomised controlled trials evaluating interventions for childbirth trauma. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised trials were identified by searching bibliographical databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of different techniques in the management of perineal lacerations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two researchers independently assessed studies for inclusion, evaluated methodological quality, and extracted the relevant data. Spearman's ρ correlation and multivariate linear regression analysis using the backward stepwise model were used for analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-eight randomised trials, reporting data from 20 308 women, were included. Seventeen different interventions were evaluated. Included trials reported 77 different outcomes and 50 different outcome measures. Commonly reported outcomes included pain (34 trials; 70%), wound healing (20 trials; 42%), and anorectal dysfunction (16 trials, 33%). In the multivariate analysis, no relationship was demonstrated between the quality of outcome reporting and year of publication (P = 0.31), journal impact factor (P = 0.49), and methodological quality (P = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Outcome reporting in childbirth trauma research is heterogeneous. Developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set in future childbirth trauma research could help address these issues. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Developing @coreoutcomes for childbirth trauma research could help to reduce #research waste.

Diagnosis and management of endometriosis: a systematic review of international and national guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The development of clinical guidelines requires standardised methods informed by robust evidence synthesis. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the methodological quality of endometriosis guidelines, mapped their recommendations, and explored the relationships between recommendations and research evidence. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed from inception to February 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included guidelines related to the diagnosis and management of endometriosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The search strategy identified 879 titles and abstracts. We include two international and five national guidelines. Four independent authors assessed the methodological quality of the included guidelines, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE-II) instrument, and systematically extracted the guideline recommendations and supporting research evidence. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-two different recommendations were made. Ten recommendations (7%) were comparable across guidelines. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology was objectively evaluated as the highest quality guideline (methodological quality score: 88/100). There was substantial variation between the supporting evidence presented by individual guidelines for comparable recommendations. Forty-two recommendations (28%) were not supported by research evidence. No guideline followed the standardised guideline development methods (AGREE-II). CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in the recommendations and methodological quality of endometriosis guidelines. Future guidelines should be developed with reference to high-quality methods in consultation with key stakeholders, including women with endometriosis, ensuring that their scope can truly inform clinical practice and eliminate unwarranted and unjustified variations in clinical practice. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: #Endometriosis guidelines vary in recommendations and quality. @EndometriosisUK.

Inadequate safety reporting in pre-eclampsia trials: a systematic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Randomised trials and their syntheses in meta-analyses offer a unique opportunity to assess the frequency and severity of adverse reactions. OBJECTIVE: To assess safety reporting in pre-eclampsia trials. SEARCH STRATEGY: Systematic search using bibliographic databases, including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and MEDLINE, from inception to August 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials evaluating anticonvulsant or antihypertensive medication for pre-eclampsia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics appraising the adequacy of adverse reaction and toxicity reporting. MAIN RESULTS: We included 60 randomised trials. Six trials (10%) were registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, two registry records referred to adverse reactions, stating 'safety and toleration' and 'possible side effects' would be collected. Twenty-six trials (43%) stated the frequency of withdrawals within each study arm, and five trials (8%) adequately reported these withdrawals. Adverse reactions were inconsistently reported across eligible trials: 24 (40%) reported no serious adverse reactions and 36 (60%) reported no mild adverse reactions. The methods of definition or measurement of adverse reactions were infrequently reported within published trial reports. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-eclampsia trials regularly omit critical information related to safety. Despite the paucity of reporting, randomised trials collect an enormous amount of safety data. Developing and implementing a minimum data set could help to improve safety reporting, permitting a more balanced assessment of interventions by considering the trade-off between the benefits and harms. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (DRF-2014-07-051), UK; Maternity Forum, Royal Society of Medicine, UK. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Developing @coreoutcomes could help to improve safety reporting in #preeclampsia trials. @NIHR_DC.

Outcome reporting across randomised controlled trials evaluating therapeutic interventions for pre-eclampsia.

BACKGROUND: Standardising outcome collection and reporting in pre-eclampsia trials requires an appraisal of current outcome reporting. OBJECTIVES: To map maternal and offspring outcome reporting across randomised trials evaluating therapeutic interventions for pre-eclampsia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised trials were identified by searching bibliographical databases from inception to January 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We systematically extracted and categorised outcome reporting. MAIN RESULTS: Seventy-nine randomised trials, reporting data from 31 615 maternal participants and 28 172 of their offspring, were included. Fifty-five different interventions were evaluated. Included trials reported 119 different outcomes, including 72 maternal outcomes and 47 offspring outcomes. Maternal outcomes were inconsistently reported across included trials; for example, 11 trials (14%) reported maternal mortality, reporting data from 12 422 participants, and 16 trials (20%) reported cardiovascular morbidity, reporting data from 14 963 maternal participants. Forty-three trials (54%) reported fetal outcomes and 23 trials (29%) reported neonatal outcomes. Twenty-eight trials (35%) reported offspring mortality. There was poor reporting of childhood outcomes: six trials (8%) reported neurodevelopmental outcomes. Less than half of included trials reported any relevant information regarding harms for maternal participants and their offspring. CONCLUSIONS: Most randomised trials evaluating interventions for pre-eclampsia are missing information on clinically important outcomes, and in particular have neglected to evaluate efficacy and safety in the offspring of participants. Developing and implementing a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, in future pre-eclampsia trials could help to address these issues. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Future #preeclampsia research requires a core outcome set to reduce #research waste. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42015015529; www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.aspID=CRD42015015529.

Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Variation in outcome collection and reporting is a serious hindrance to progress in our specialty; therefore, over 80 journals have come together to support the development, dissemination, and implementation of core outcome sets. OBJECTIVE: This study systematically reviewed and characterised registered, progressing, or completed core outcome sets relevant to women's and newborn health. SEARCH STRATEGY: Systematic search using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative and the Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health initiative databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Registry entries, protocols, systematic reviews, and core outcome sets. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics to describe characteristics and results. RESULTS: There were 49 core outcome sets registered in maternal and newborn health, with the majority registered in 2015 (n = 22; 48%) or 2016 (n = 16; 32%). Benign gynaecology (n = 8; 16%) and newborn health (n = 3; 6%) are currently under-represented. Twenty-four (52%) core outcome sets were funded by international (n = 1; <1%), national (n = 18; 38%), and regional (n = 4; 8%) bodies. Seven protocols were published. Twenty systematic reviews have characterised the inconsistency in outcome reporting across a broad range of relevant healthcare conditions. Four core outcome sets were completed: reconstructive breast surgery (11 outcomes), preterm birth (13 outcomes), epilepsy in pregnancy (29 outcomes), and maternity care (48 outcomes). The quantitative, qualitative, and consensus methods used to develop core outcome sets varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: Core outcome sets are currently being developed across women's and newborn health, although coverage of topics is variable. Development of further infrastructure to develop, disseminate, and implement core outcome sets is urgently required. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Forty-nine women's and newborn core outcome sets registered. 50% funded. 7 protocols, 20 systematic reviews, and 4 core outcome sets published. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy.

Diagnostic accuracy of cancer antigen 125 for endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The development of a non-invasive and accurate diagnostic biomarker for endometriosis is urgently needed. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of serum cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) for endometriosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science from inception to January 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Diagnostic accuracy studies of serum CA 125 (index test) for histologically confirmed endometriosis (reference standard) were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials, extracted study characteristics and data. Methodological quality was assessed using Quality Assessment of Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (16 cohort, six case-control), 3626 participants, were identified. Bivariate hierarchical models were used to pool accuracy data of 14 studies (2920 participants) using CA 125 ≥ 30 units/ml. Pooled specificity was 93% (95% CI 89-95%) and sensitivity 52% (95% CI 38-66%). CA 125 was significantly more sensitive for the diagnosis of moderate or severe endometriosis compared with minimal disease (63%, 95% CI 47-77% versus 24%, 95%CI 19-32%, P-value = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CA 125 performs well as a rule-in test facilitating expedited diagnosis and ensuring investigation and treatment can be confidently tailored for the management of endometriosis. Unfortunately, a negative test, CA 125 < 30 units/ml, is unable to rule out endometriosis. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Blood test CA 125: a rule-in test for the diagnosis of women presenting with symptoms of endometriosis.