Development of a core outcome set for treatment studies for provoked vestibulodynia.

BACKGROUND: There is an inconsistency in treatment outcomes used in clinical trials for provoked vestibulodynia (PVD), which makes it impossible to compare the effects of different interventions. AIM: In this study, we completed the first step in creating a core outcome set (COS), defining what outcomes should be measured in clinical trials for PVD. METHODS: Identification of outcomes used in studies was done by extracting data from clinical trials in a recently published systematic review and via review of clinical trials for PVD registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. The COS process consisted of 2 rounds of Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting, during which the final COS was decided through a modified nominal group technique. OUTCOMES: Consensus on what outcomes to include in a COS for PVD. RESULTS: Forty scientific articles and 92 study protocols were reviewed for outcomes. Of those, 36 articles and 25 protocols were eligible, resulting in 402 outcomes, which were then categorized into 63 unique outcomes. Participants consisted of patients, relatives/partners of patients, health care professionals, and researchers. Out of 463 who registered for participation, 319 and 213 responded to the first and second surveys, respectively. The consensus meeting consisted of 18 members and resulted in 6 outcomes for the COS to be measured in all treatment trials regardless of intervention: insertional pain (nonsexual), insertional pain (sexual), provoked vulvar pain by pressure/contact, pain-related interference on one's life, pain interference on sexual life, and sexual function. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Critical outcomes to be measured in clinical trials will allow for accurate comparison of outcomes across treatment interventions and provide solid treatment recommendations. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: The major strengths of the study are the adherence to methodological recommendations and the intentional focus on aspects of diversity of participating stakeholders (eg, status such as patients with lived experience and researchers, inclusiveness with respect to sexual identity), the latter of which will allow for broader application and relevance of the COS. Among the limitations of the study are the low rate of participants outside North America and Europe and the lower response rate (about 50%) for the second Delphi survey. CONCLUSION: In this international project, patients, health care professionals, and researchers have decided what critical outcomes are to be used in future clinical trials for PVD. Before the COS can be fully implemented, there is also a need to decide on how and preferably when the outcomes should be measured.

Core Outcome Sets (COS) related to pregnancy and childbirth: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews often conclude low confidence in the results due to heterogeneity in the reported outcomes. A Core Outcome Set (COS) is an agreed standardised collection of outcomes for a specific area of health. The outcomes included in a COS are to be measured and summarized in clinical trials as well as systematic reviews to counteract this heterogeneity. AIM: The aim is to identify, compile and assess final and ongoing studies that are prioritizing outcomes in the area of pregnancy and childbirth. METHODS: All studies which prioritized outcomes related to pregnancy and childbirth using consensus method, including Delphi surveys or consensus meetings were included. Searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Academic Search Elite, CINAHL, SocINDEX and COMET databases up to June 2021. For all studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria, information regarding outcomes as well as population, method, and setting was extracted. In addition, reporting in the finalized studies was assessed using a modified version of the Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting. RESULTS: In total, 27 finalized studies and 42 ongoing studies were assessed as relevant and were included. In the finalized studies, the number of outcomes included in the COS ranged from 6 to 51 with a median of 13 outcomes. The majority of the identified COS, both finalized as well as ongoing, were relating to physical complications during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: There is a growing number of Core Outcome Set studies related to pregnancy and childbirth. Although several of the finalized studies follow the proposed reporting, there are still some items that are not always clearly reported. Additionally, several of the identified COS contained a large number (n > 20) outcomes, something that possibly could hinder implementation. Therefore, there is a need to consider the number of outcomes which may be included in a COS to render it optimal for future research.

Organisational models of health services for children and adolescents in out-of-home care: Health technology assessment.

AIM: Decades of research confirm that children and adolescents in out-of-home care (foster family, residential care) have much greater health care needs than their peers. A systematic literature review was conducted to evaluate organisational health care models for this vulnerable group. METHODS: A systematic literature search was undertaken of the following databases: Academic Search Elite, CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cinahl, DARE, ERIC, HTA, PsycInfo, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, PubMed, SocIndex. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials were to be included. Two pairs of reviewers independently assessed abstracts of the identified published papers. Abstracts meeting the inclusion criteria were ordered in full text. Each article was reviewed independently, by pairs of reviewers. A joint assessment was made based on the inclusion criteria and relevance. Cases of disagreement were resolved by consensus discussion. RESULTS: No study with low or medium risk of bias was identified. CONCLUSION: In the absence of studies of acceptable quality, it is not possible to assess the impact of organisational models intended to ensure adequate health and dental care for children and adolescents in out-of-home care. Therefore, well-designed follow-up studies should be conducted following the implementation of such models.