A protocol developing, disseminating and implementing a core outcome set for infertility

Abstract STUDY QUESTIONS We aim to produce, disseminate and implement a core outcome set for future infertility research. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating infertility treatments have reported many different outcomes, which are often defined and measured in different ways. Such variation contributes to an inability to compare, contrast and combine results of individual RCTs. The development of a core outcome set will ensure outcomes important to key stakeholders are consistently collected and reported across future infertility research. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This is a consensus study using the modified Delphi method. All stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, allied healthcare professionals, researchers and people with lived experience of infertility will be invited to participate. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS An international steering group, including people with lived experience of infertility, healthcare professionals, allied healthcare professionals and researchers, has been formed to guide the development of this core outcome set. Potential core outcomes have been identified through a comprehensive literature review of RCTs evaluating treatments for infertility and will be entered into a modified Delphi method. Participants will be asked to score potential core outcomes on a nine-point Likert scale anchored between one (not important) and nine (critical). Repeated reflection and rescoring should promote convergence towards consensus ‘core’ outcomes. We will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for individual core outcomes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This project is funded by the Royal Society of New Zealand Catalyst Fund (3712235). BWM reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, Merck, and ObsEva. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Fractyl and Ogeda and research sponsorship from Ferring. S.B. is the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

[1]  S. Ziebland,et al.  Inadequate safety reporting in pre‐eclampsia trials: a systematic evaluation , 2018, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[2]  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.

[3]  S. Ziebland,et al.  A systematic review of primary outcomes and outcome measure reporting in randomized trials evaluating treatments for pre‐eclampsia , 2017, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[4]  K. Hecher,et al.  Twin–Twin Transfusion Syndrome: study protocol for developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set , 2017, Trials.

[5]  N. Modi,et al.  Developing, implementing and disseminating a core outcome set for neonatal medicine , 2017, BMJ Paediatrics Open.

[6]  S. Ziebland,et al.  Outcome reporting across randomised controlled trials evaluating therapeutic interventions for pre‐eclampsia , 2017, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[7]  J. Wilkinson,et al.  Reducing research waste in benign gynaecology and fertility research , 2017, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[8]  D. Grossman,et al.  Standardizing abortion research outcomes (STAR): a protocol for developing, disseminating and implementing a core outcome set for medical and surgical abortion☆ , 2017, Contraception.

[9]  S. Roberts,et al.  Direct-to-consumer advertising of success rates for medically assisted reproduction: a review of national clinic websites , 2017, BMJ Open.

[10]  S. Roberts,et al.  No common denominator: a review of outcome measures in IVF RCTs , 2016, Human reproduction.

[11]  S. Ziebland,et al.  A protocol for developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set for pre-eclampsia. , 2016, Pregnancy hypertension.

[12]  Caroline B. Terwee,et al.  How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline , 2016, Trials.

[13]  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.

[14]  M. Plana,et al.  Variation in outcome reporting in endometriosis trials: a systematic review. , 2016, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[15]  G. Saade,et al.  A Core Outcome Set for Evaluation of Interventions to Prevent Preterm Birth , 2016, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[16]  B. Mol,et al.  Effectiveness and safety as outcome measures in reproductive medicine. , 2015, Human reproduction.

[17]  D. Altman,et al.  Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  Andrew Forbes,et al.  Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions. , 2014, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[19]  K. Khan.  The CROWN Initiative: journal editors invite researchers to develop core outcomes in women's health , 2014, Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care.

[20]  B. Mol,et al.  How are neonatal and maternal outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in reproductive medicine? , 2014, Human reproduction.

[21]  Rosalind B King,et al.  Prevalence of infertility in the United States as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach. , 2013, Fertility and sterility.

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

[23]  Lisa Bero,et al.  Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[24]  W. Dodson,et al.  Incomplete and inconsistent reporting of maternal and fetal outcomes in infertility treatment trials. , 2011, Fertility and sterility.

[25]  G. Guyatt,et al.  GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  D G Altman,et al.  Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[27]  P. Williamson,et al.  Using the Delphi Technique to Determine Which Outcomes to Measure in Clinical Trials: Recommendations for the Future Based on a Systematic Review of Existing Studies , 2011, PLoS medicine.

[28]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[29]  G D Adamson,et al.  International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. , 2009, Fertility and sterility.

[30]  D. Altman,et al.  Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[31]  D. Altman,et al.  Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research , 2004, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[32]  A. V. Van Steirteghem,et al.  Overall prognosis with current treatment of infertility. , 2004, Human reproduction update.

[33]  A. N. Corps,et al.  A vascular endothelial growth factor antagonist is produced by the human placenta and released into the maternal circulation. , 1998, Biology of reproduction.

[34]  Theresa Schilhab,et al.  Issues to Consider , 2017 .

[35]  E. Ng.  Improving the Reporting of Clinical Trials of Infertility Treatments (IMPRINT): modifying the CONSORT statement. , 2014, Fertility and sterility.

[36]  E. Hughes,et al.  Growth hormone for in vitro fertilization. , 2003, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[37]  N. Johnson,et al.  Postoperative procedures for improving fertility following pelvic reproductive surgery. , 2000, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.