Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, 2016 1 The Cochrane Skin Group - Core Outcome Set Initiative to develop core outcome.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Cochrane Library. What is The Cochrane Library? The Cochrane Library offers high-quality evidence for health care decision making
Advertisements

ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
"How's our impact?: Developing a survey toolkit to assess how health library services impact on patient care" Alison Weightman July 2008.
Introduction to Competency-Based Residency Education
Protocol Development.
Systematic Reviews Dr Sharon Mickan Centre for Evidence-based Medicine
Instances the user perspective is also important to the decision making process. In order to achieve a realistic and practical outcome, district administrators.
Doctors with dyslexia: a systematic review of effective workarounds Dr Rachel Locke 1, Dr Samantha Scallan 1, Dr Richard Mann 2 and Ms Gail Alexander 3.
Teaching/Learning Strategies to Support Evidence-Based Practice Asoc. prof. Vida Staniuliene Klaipeda State College Dean of Faculty of Health Sciences.
Authors and affiliation Research, University of Sheffield, 3 East Midlands Ambulance Service Study flow Conclusion In addition to measures relating to.
Accessing Sources Of Evidence For Practice Introduction To Databases Karen Smith Department of Health Sciences University of York.
1 Enhancing Evidence-based Information Access to Inform Public Health Practice Modeling Public Health Information Needs and Accessing Requirements December.
How do nurses use new technologies to inform decision making?
Behavioral Health Services for Injured or Ill workers – Collaborative Care Analysis and Recommendations January 22, 2015.
Developing Research Proposal Systematic Review Mohammed TA, Omar Ph.D. PT Rehabilitation Health Science.
The following slides were presented at a meeting of potential editors and methods advisors for the proposed Cochrane review group in February The.
Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines
Patient Centered Medical Home What it means for Duffy Health Center Board Presentation September 10 th 2012.
HRB Centre for Primary Care Research Department of General Practice RCSI Medical School Developing an International Register of CPRs for Primary Care:
Development of Clinical Practice Guidelines for the NHS Dr Jacqueline Dutchak, Director National Collaborating Centre for Acute Care 16 January 2004.
Rehabilitation Teaching and Research Unit, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences Outcome measures in psoriatic arthritis Preliminary identification.
1 How to find literature - A very short introduction SMED 8004 Medicine and Health Library October 2014.
THE COCHRANE LIBRARY ON WILEY INTERSCIENCE. Presentation Agenda Brief introduction of Evidence-Based Medicine theories The Cochrane Collaboration – origins,
Systematic Reviews.
Zoe G. Davies Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation University of Birmingham, UK Systematic Review Methodology: a brief summary.
Core Outcome Domains for Eczema – Results of a Delphi Consensus Project Introduction Eczema is a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory skin disorder that affects.
School of Population Health University of Melbourne Global systematic review initiatives: moving forward in partnership Elizabeth Waters.
Simon Wills Head of Wessex Drug & Medicines Information Centre Introduction Research is needed to help inform service development and to demonstrate the.
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
Organization and guideline development April 2010 ACCC The Netherlands.
Finding Relevant Evidence
More-2-Eat: Implementation of the the Integrated Nutrition Care Pathway for Acute Care (INPAC)
Assessment of Care Transitions (ACT) Dr. Ayse P. Gurses Dr. Mahiyar Nasarwanji.
Knowledge into Action: supporting education and learning Host: Derek Boyle Senior Knowledge Manager, NHS Education for Scotland
February February 2008 Evidence Based Medicine –Evidence Based Medicine Centre –Best Practice –BMJ Clinical Evidence –BMJ Best.
BMH CLINICAL GUIDELINES IN EUROPE. OUTLINE Background to the project Objectives The AGREE Instrument: validation process and results Outcomes.
2nd Concertation Meeting Brussels, September 8, 2011 Reinhard Prior, Scientific Coordinator, HIM Evidence in telemedicine: a literature review.
Doing a Systematic Review Jo Hunter Linda Atkinson Oxford University Health Care Libraries 1 March 2006 Workshops in Information Skills and Electronic.
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :呂宥達 Date : 2005/10/27.
1 Strategic Plan Review. 2 Process Planning and Evaluation Committee will be discussing 2 directions per meeting. October meeting- Finance and Governance.
Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research Mike Clarke, Chair.
Internet Resources for Evidence-Based Practice Ben Skinner KnowledgeShare.
NIHR Themed Call Prevention and treatment of obesity Writing a good application and the role of the RDS 19 th January 2016.
CoBa-IT Working Groups Methodology and next actions.
Informatio Medicata, Budapest, Oct
What is a journal club? Anthea Colledge Dept of Primary Care and Social Medicine.
Sources of systematic reviews Arash Etemadi, MD PhD Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences.
LEARN. CARE. COMMUNITY. PNWU.edu Figure 1: Concept Map for IPE Fidelity 1.Determine the rubric score that represents high, medium, and low fidelity. 2.Identify.
Musculoskeletal Pain Clinical Study Group Report on Podiatry Consensus Meeting Prof. Jim Woodburn School of Health & Social Care. Glasgow Caledonian University,
Training for organisations participating in Peer Review of Paediatric Diabetes.
Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-based Healthcare resources Roger Tritton: Senior Publisher, ProQuest.
Today’s presentation  Background and context  Rationale  Aim and objectives  Design and method  Impact  Reflective commentary  Transferability.
ACNE CORE OUTCOMES RESEARCH NETWORK Information for new members 11/2015.
Program Planning for Evidence-based Health Programs.
Identifying evidence and maintaining a specialised register of studies Dr Alison Weightman Director, Support Unit for Research Evidence (SURE), Cardiff.
Guidelines for depression in palliative care WP 3.2 : EPCRC : Trondheim Irene Higginson, Alison Evans, Matthew Hotopf.
SECONDARY PREVENTION IN HEART DISEASE CATHY QUICK AUBURN UNIVERSITY/AUBURN MONTGOMERY EBP III.
European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education Project updates Marcella Turner-Cmuchal.
Conferenceboard.ca Aligning, Foreseeing, and Optimizing HTA in Canada 2016 CADTH Symposium April 12, 2016 Dr. Gabriela Prada Director, Health Innovation.
Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University
MUHC Innovation Model.
WP 4 – EPIDEMIOLOGY GEMMA Gatta
Lifestyle factors in the development of diabetes among African immigrants in the UK: A systematic review Alloh T. Folashade Faculty of Health and Social.
Research & scholarship
What are systematic reviews and why do we need them?
Systematic review of atopic dermatitis disease definition in studies using routinely-collected health data M.P. Dizon, A.M. Yu, R.K. Singh, J. Wan, M-M.
C.I.M. Busard, J.Y.C. Nolte, M.C. Pasch, Ph.I. Spuls
Patient reported outcome measures for facial skin cancer: a systematic review and evaluation of the quality of their measurement properties Tom Dobbs,
Task Force Peer reviews and quality Eurostat
Presentation transcript:

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, The Cochrane Skin Group - Core Outcome Set Initiative to develop core outcome sets across the whole of dermatology Jan Kottner On behalf of the CSG-COUSIN

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Background I Non-comparable outcome measures in clinical trials I Core Outcome Set is minimum set of outcomes to be assessed and reported in clinical trial I Outcome domains I Outcome measurement instruments

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, What is the CSG-COUSIN? I Working group within the CSG I International, multidisciplinary I Aims ― To support the development of high quality COS in dermatology ― To standardize the selection of outcomes and outcome measurement instruments in dermatology clinical trials to make clinical trial evidence comparable ― To strengthen the quality and interpretability of evidence in dermatology through the implementation of COS in clinical trials and systematic reviews

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, History I Foundation CSG-COUSIN in 2014 ― Prof. Jochen Schmitt, Dresden ― Prof. Hywel C. Williams, Nottingham I Inaugural Meeting at the Annual CSG Meeting in Dresden (March 2015) ― 29 participants with diverse professional backgrounds and perspectives ― Introduction CSG-COUSIN ― Exchange of ideas ― Development of future plans

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Structure I Head ― Prof. Dr. Jochen Schmitt, MPH I Coordination ― Centre for Evidence-Based Healthcare at the Medical School of Dresden, Germany I Support ― Cochrane Skin Group, Nottingham I Three teams ― International ― Multidisciplinary ― Open for everyone

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Management-Team I Coordination of CSG-COUSIN I Support of Methods Group and Project Teams I First point of contact, organization of regular meetings I Provision of resources, e.g. articles, news I Summary of COS projects in dermatology I Establishment and maintenance of homepage I Newsletter I Creation of visibility and awareness I Support of publications Management Team

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Methods Group I Provides Methodological Support I Internal peer review for CSG-COUSIN project groups I Conducts methodological studies on outcomes research and COS development I Development of methodological standards based on HOME roadmap I Support of implementation of COS Methods Group

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, 2016 Project Groups 8 Project Groups I Development and implementation of Core Outcome Sets I Group composition ― Leader ― One member of methods group ― Patient representative ― Experts ― Methodologists ― Clinicians ― Others

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Homepage

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Meeting (2015) report

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Meta-epidemiologic study

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Meta-epidemiologic study I MS Access data extraction tool created I All available data from Cochrane reviews imported I First training data entry compled I Based on feedback full data extraction will start in February 2016 I Envisioned goal: data extraction and preliminary results available December 2016

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Quick guide for COS developers

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Quick guide for COS developers StepKey questions/tasksTo dos and explanations Preparation Do we really need a COS? Look into the literature and into epidemiological data The answer should be “yes” if (1) there is a high incidence, prevalence, and/or high impact in terms of quality of life, costs and/or mortality of the disease or condition (burden of disease) (2) various non-comparable outcomes are used in clinical research especially in clinical trials and/or systematic reviews/meta-analyses (3) if outcomes in clinical research are unlikely to be relevant and meaningful (e.g. for patients or service users) Is there already a COS of interest available and/or under development? Check the COMET database Check with the COMET Project Coordinator Visit the CSG-COUSIN homepage Consult the CSG-COUSIN coordinator Search the internet via common search engines Search electronic databases

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Quick guide for COS developers StepKey questions/tasksTo dos and explanations Protocol Write a protocol for the COS development (or for different steps) in accordance with the HOME roadmap Specify all steps, tasks, planned people to involve and why Specify the expected results of each work package Register your initiative at COMET and at the CSG-COUSIN homepage Set up the COS development group consisting of at least clinicians and methodologists and patients Does the protocol follows current best practice for COS development? Clearly define the health problem, the population and setting Study the latest methodological recommendations Include experts in your group Look for (external) feedback for your protocol Include relevant stakeholders in a meaningful way

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Quick guide for COS developers StepKey questions/tasksTo dos and explanations Outcome domains Identify possible outcome domains Outcome domains define “what” to be measured Essential features of the disease/conditions e.g. in terms of mortality, life impact, resource use, pathophysiological manifestations Use and/or do a (systematic) review and make a preliminary selection of outcomes (domains) covering at least the two databases Medline and Embase Develop inductively and iteratively possible outcome domains Look for further input, e.g. from experts, patients (What is important for them?) Define the core outcome domains Do a consensus study (Delphi or Nominal groups) involving relevant stakeholders (patients, clinicians, clinical researchers) to be followed by a face-to-face group meeting plus voting to define and/or select outcome domains for outcome measurement development Define decision rules a priori Select outcome domains for outcome measurement development Publish the results according to the checklist of Williamson et al. 2012

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Quick guide for COS developers Outcome measurements What instruments exist per domain? Identify all measurement instruments of the domain of interest using a systematic review covering at least the two databases Medline and Embase to create a list of existing instruments What are the psychometric/ clinimetric properties of these instruments? Identify the empirical evidence supporting the validity of the scores or parameters Consider to use the search algorithms and filters provided by COSMIN Do a methodological and quality appraisal of the validation studies, by applying quality criteria. COSMIN is one of the best developed framework for doing this. Identify missing validation evidence Generate missing validation evidence (if needed) Plan, conduct, and report the validation studies based on highest methodological standards (e.g. following STARD 2015; GRRAS; COSMIN) Evaluate the quality of the instruments Appraise the validation evidence taking the methodological appraisal of the study quality into account (e.g. using COSMIN) Perform a best evidence synthesis / apply levels of evidence in order to come to a short list of instruments that have the potential to be included in the COS. Define the core outcome instruments Do a consensus study (Delphi or Nominal groups) involving the relevant stakeholders (patients, clinicians, clinical researchers) to be followed by a face-to-face group meeting plus voting to select one core outcome instrument per core outcome domain Define decision rules a priori Select one core outcome instrument per core outcome domain

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Quick guide for COS developers DisseminationMake your results available Publish your results in leading journals Present at conferences, meetings, symposia Register your results in COMET and at the CSG-COUSIN homepage Make sure that the CSG knows about them so that it can encourage reviewers to adopt them in systematic reviews Share your experience e.g. in the CSG-COUSIN group Use the COS Does your work make an impact? Monitor the use of the COS (e.g. using citation databases Scopus, Web of Science, clinical trial registries) Does the COS need revision e.g. due to new measurement instruments, new evidence, emerging problems of COS usage Weigh the decision to revise against the need that the COS should not change

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, 2016 Project Groups 19 Current project groups within CSG-COUSIN Acne vulgaris (ACORN)ACORNAtopic Eczema (HOME)HOME Appearance of Facial Aging (IMPROVED) Hand Eczema Hidradenitis suppurativaIncontinence-associated Dermatitis MelanomaNail psoriasis UrticariaVascular malformations (OVAMA) VitiligoWound healing

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Discussion points I I COS initiatives in many fields, OMERACT handbook since 2015, COMET handbook expected in 2016 → What role does HOME roadmap play? I Is COS development discipline specific? I Harmonization of concepts needed, e.g. “domain” in HOME roadmap vs. OMERACT

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Discussion points II I Glossary of terms would be nice to have → How to achieve agreement? I Can we formalize a need for a COS? I Additional entries in COMET: scar, melasma, post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation, actinic keratosis, alopecia, … (January 2016) → How do we deal with COS projects not affiliated to CSG-COUSIN?

Annual Cochrane Skin Group Meeting, London, February 22nd & 23rd, Get involved I All teams are open and welcome to interested new members ― who wants to develop a new Core Outcome Set ― who wants to be a part of a COS-project team ― who wants to use a specific COS ― who are searching for methodical advice ― who wants to work methodical in the field of COS Contact Cochrane Skin Group - Core Outcome Set Initiative University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare Director: Prof. Dr. med. Jochen Schmitt, MPH (0)