Development of a Core Set of Outcomes for Randomized Controlled Trials with Multiple Outcomes – Example of Pulp Treatments of Primary Teeth for Extensive Decay in Children
Open Access
- 3 January 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 8 (1) , e51908
Abstract
Evidence-based comparisons of interventions can be challenging because of the diversity of outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to describe outcomes in RCTs assessing pulp treatments for primary teeth and to develop a core set of component outcomes to be part of composite outcome defining the failure of a pulp treatment. We systematically reviewed articles of RCTs comparing pulp treatments for primary molars published up to February 2012. We abstracted all outcomes assessed in each trial, then used a small-group consensus process to group similar outcomes, which were reduced to a composite outcome of failure of a pulp treatment by a 3-round Delphi process involving expert authors and dentists. We included 47 reports of RCTs in the review, for 83 reported outcomes (median 11 outcomes per RCT). These outcomes were grouped into 24 overarching outcome categories. We contacted 210 experts for the Delphi process and 25% to 30% participated. The process identified the following 5 component outcomes as part of a composite outcome of failure of a pulp treatment: soft-tissue pathology, pain, pathologic mobility, pathologic radiolucency and pathologic root resorption. RCTs of pulp treatments for primary teeth investigate diverse outcomes. Our consensus process, involving clinicians but no patient, allowed for compiling a core set of component outcomes to define the composite outcome failure of a pulp treatment for primary teeth.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to considerTrials, 2012
- The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trialsBMJ, 2011
- Using the Delphi Technique to Determine Which Outcomes to Measure in Clinical Trials: Recommendations for the Future Based on a Systematic Review of Existing StudiesPLOS Medicine, 2011
- Assessing the potential for outcome reporting bias in a review: a tutorialTrials, 2010
- Attention should be given to multiplicity issues in systematic reviewsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2008
- Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting BiasPLOS ONE, 2008
- Standardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviewsTrials, 2007
- OMERACT: An international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatologyTrials, 2007
- Association Between Unreported Outcomes and Effect Size Estimates in Cochrane Meta-analysesJAMA, 2007
- Validity of composite end points in clinical trialsBMJ, 2005