Has the reporting of patient‐important outcomes improved in surgical trials? A meta‐epidemiological study

Clinical trials should ideally use patient‐important outcomes to ensure their results are clinically relevant. We aimed to determine if the proportion of patient‐important outcomes in surgical trials has changed over the last decade, and to determine whether patient‐important outcomes are more likely to be specified as primary outcomes.

[1]  A. Hrõbjartsson,et al.  Promoting public access to clinical trial protocols: challenges and recommendations , 2018, Trials.

[2]  Joanna Coast,et al.  Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-PRO Extension , 2018, JAMA.

[3]  R. Mittal,et al.  Are outcomes reported in surgical randomized trials patient-important? A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2017, Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie.

[4]  P. Tugwell,et al.  Developing core outcome measurement sets for clinical trials: OMERACT filter 2.0. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  M. Rovers,et al.  Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Clinical Trials of Surgical Interventions , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[6]  Joel Lexchin,et al.  Surrogate outcomes in clinical trials: a cautionary tale. , 2013, JAMA internal medicine.

[7]  David Moher,et al.  Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. , 2013, JAMA.

[8]  D. Rennie,et al.  SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. , 2013, Annals of internal medicine.

[9]  J. Sterne,et al.  Comparison of treatment effect sizes associated with surrogate and final patient relevant outcomes in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study , 2013, BMJ.

[10]  Jane M Blazeby,et al.  Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider , 2012, Trials.

[11]  Claire Glenton,et al.  User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful Summary of Findings tables for Cochrane reviews. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[12]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, BMC medicine.

[13]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics.

[14]  David W. Taggart,et al.  No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations , 2009, The Lancet.

[15]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Patient-important outcomes in registered diabetes trials. , 2008, JAMA.

[16]  R. Pointner,et al.  Patient-reported outcomes. How important are they? , 2007, Surgical Endoscopy.

[17]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature: XIX. Applying clinical trial results. A. How to use an article measuring the effect of an intervention on surrogate end points. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1999, JAMA.

[18]  D. DeMets,et al.  Surrogate End Points in Clinical Trials: Are We Being Misled? , 1996, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[19]  A. Camm,et al.  Lessons from the cardiac arrhythmia suppression trial. , 1989, BMJ.