A core outcome set for trials in miscarriage management and prevention: An international consensus development study

OBJECTIVE To develop core outcome sets (COS) for miscarriage management and prevention. DESIGN Modified Delphi survey combined with a consensus development meeting. SETTING International. POPULATION Stakeholder groups included healthcare providers, international experts, researchers, charities and couples with lived experience of miscarriage from 15 countries: 129 stakeholders for miscarriage management and 437 for miscarriage prevention. METHODS Modified Delphi method and modified nominal group technique. RESULTS The final COS for miscarriage management comprises six outcomes: efficacy of treatment, heavy vaginal bleeding, pelvic infection, maternal death, treatment or procedure-related complications, and patient satisfaction. The final COS for miscarriage prevention comprises 12 outcomes: pregnancy loss <24 weeks' gestation, live birth, gestation at birth, pre-term birth, congenital abnormalities, fetal growth restriction, maternal (antenatal) complications, compliance with intervention, patient satisfaction, maternal hospitalisation, neonatal or infant hospitalisation, and neonatal or infant death. Other outcomes identified as important were mental health-related outcomes, future fertility and health economic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS This study has developed two core outcome sets, through robust methodology, that should be implemented across future randomised trials and systematic reviews in miscarriage management and prevention. This work will help to standardise outcome selection, collection and reporting, and improve the quality and safety of future studies in miscarriage.

[1]  N. L. Vuong,et al.  Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study. , 2020, Fertility and sterility.

[2]  S. Ziebland,et al.  A core outcome set for pre‐eclampsia research: an international consensus development study , 2020, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[3]  B. Ata,et al.  A core outcome set for future endometriosis research: an international consensus development study , 2020, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[4]  A. Coomarasamy,et al.  Outcomes in prevention and management of miscarriage trials: a systematic review , 2018, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[5]  Z. Bhutta,et al.  Core outcome sets for prevention and treatment of postpartum haemorrhage: an international Delphi consensus study , 2018, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[6]  Jane M Blazeby,et al.  Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations , 2017, PLoS medicine.

[7]  A. Coomarasamy,et al.  Core Outcome Sets in Miscarriage Trials (COSMisT) study: a study protocol , 2017, BMJ Open.

[8]  S. Ziebland,et al.  Core outcome sets in women's and newborn health: a systematic review , 2017, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[9]  J. Duffy,et al.  Influence of methodology upon the identification of potential core outcomes: recommendations for core outcome set developers are needed , 2016, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[10]  R. Romero,et al.  The CROWN initiative: journal editors invite researchers to develop core outcomes in women's health. , 2014, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[11]  O. Christiansen,et al.  Terminology for pregnancy loss prior to viability: a consensus statement from the ESHRE early pregnancy special interest group. , 2014, Human reproduction.

[12]  B. Feldman,et al.  Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[13]  David Moher,et al.  SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials , 2013, BMJ.

[14]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  M. Gallagher,et al.  The nominal group technique: a research tool for general practice? , 1993, Family practice.

[16]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. , 1998, Health technology assessment.