Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Which clinical research questions are the most important? Development and preliminary validation of the Australia & New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT).
Taylor, William J; Willink, Robin; O'Connor, Denise A; Patel, Vinay; Bourne, Allison; Harris, Ian A; Whittle, Samuel L; Richards, Bethan; Clavisi, Ornella; Green, Sally; Hinman, Rana S; Maher, Chris G; Cahill, Ainslie; McPherson, Annie; Hewson, Charlotte; May, Suzie E; Walker, Bruce; Robinson, Philip C; Ghersi, Davina; Fitzpatrick, Jane; Winzenberg, Tania; Fallon, Kieran; Glasziou, Paul; Billot, Laurent; Buchbinder, Rachelle.
Afiliação
  • Taylor WJ; University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
  • Willink R; Hutt Valley District Health Board, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.
  • O'Connor DA; Hauora Tairawhiti, Gisborne, New Zealand.
  • Patel V; University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
  • Bourne A; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
  • Harris IA; Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Victoria, Australia.
  • Whittle SL; University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
  • Richards B; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
  • Clavisi O; Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Victoria, Australia.
  • Green S; Whitlam Orthopaedic Research Centre, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Australia.
  • Hinman RS; School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Liverpool, NSW, Australia.
  • Maher CG; Institute of Rheumatology and Orthopaedics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Cahill A; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
  • McPherson A; The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
  • Hewson C; School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Liverpool, NSW, Australia.
  • May SE; Institute of Rheumatology and Orthopaedics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Walker B; Musculoskeletal Australia, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Robinson PC; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Ghersi D; Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry & Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Fitzpatrick J; Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Winzenberg T; Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Fallon K; Arthritis Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Glasziou P; Consumer Partner, ANZMUSC, Melbourne, Australia.
  • Billot L; Consumer Partner, ANZMUSC, Melbourne, Australia.
  • Buchbinder R; Consumer Partner, ANZMUSC, Melbourne, Australia.
PLoS One ; 18(3): e0281308, 2023.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36930668
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND

AIMS:

High quality clinical research that addresses important questions requires significant resources. In resource-constrained environments, projects will therefore need to be prioritized. The Australia and New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network aimed to develop a stakeholder-based, transparent, easily implementable tool that provides a score for the 'importance' of a research question which could be used to rank research projects in order of importance.

METHODS:

Using a mixed-methods, multi-stage approach that included a Delphi survey, consensus workshop, inter-rater reliability testing, validity testing and calibration using a discrete-choice methodology, the Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT) was developed. The tool incorporated broad stakeholder opinion, including consumers, at each stage and is designed for scoring by committee consensus.

RESULTS:

The ANZMUSC-RQIT tool consists of 5 dimensions (compared to 6 dimensions for an earlier version of RQIT) (1) extent of stakeholder consensus, (2) social burden of health condition, (3) patient burden of health condition, (4) anticipated effectiveness of proposed intervention, and (5) extent to which health equity is addressed by the research. Each dimension is assessed by defining ordered levels of a relevant attribute and by assigning a score to each level. The scores for the dimensions are then summed to obtain an overall ANZMUSC-RQIT score, which represents the importance of the research question. The result is a score on an interval scale with an arbitrary unit, ranging from 0 (minimal importance) to 1000. The ANZMUSC-RQIT dimensions can be reliably ordered by committee consensus (ICC 0.73-0.93) and the overall score is positively associated with citation count (standardised regression coefficient 0.33, p<0.001) and journal impact factor group (OR 6.78, 95% CI 3.17 to 14.50 for 3rd tertile compared to 1st tertile of ANZMUSC-RQIT scores) for 200 published musculoskeletal clinical trials.

CONCLUSION:

We propose that the ANZMUSC-RQIT is a useful tool for prioritising the importance of a research question.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Publicações Tipo de estudo: Guideline Aspecto: Equity_inequality Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Revista: PLoS One Assunto da revista: CIENCIA / MEDICINA Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Nova Zelândia

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Publicações Tipo de estudo: Guideline Aspecto: Equity_inequality Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Revista: PLoS One Assunto da revista: CIENCIA / MEDICINA Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Nova Zelândia