King's Fertility, Fetal Medicine Research Institute, London, UK.
Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.
Hum Reprod. 2020 Dec 1;35(12):2735-2745. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa243.
Can consensus definitions for the core outcome set for infertility be identified in order to recommend a standardized approach to reporting?
Consensus definitions for individual core outcomes, contextual statements and a standardized reporting table have been developed.
Different definitions exist for individual core outcomes for infertility. This variation increases the opportunities for researchers to engage with selective outcome reporting, which undermines secondary research and compromises clinical practice guideline development.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential definitions were identified by a systematic review of definition development initiatives and clinical practice guidelines and by reviewing Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. These definitions were discussed in a face-to-face consensus development meeting, which agreed consensus definitions. A standardized approach to reporting was also developed as part of the process.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus development methods.
Forty-four potential definitions were inventoried across four definition development initiatives, including the Harbin Consensus Conference Workshop Group and International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 12 clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. Twenty-seven participants, from 11 countries, contributed to the consensus development meeting. Consensus definitions were successfully developed for all core outcomes. Specific recommendations were made to improve reporting.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations. There was limited representation from low- and middle-income countries.
A minimum data set should assist researchers in populating protocols, case report forms and other data collection tools. The generic reporting table should provide clear guidance to researchers and improve the reporting of their results within journal publications and conference presentations. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement, and over 80 specialty journals have committed to implementing this core outcome set.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and a financial interest in NexHand. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. J.W. reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. A.V. reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form.
Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.
能否确定不孕症核心结局集的共识定义,以推荐一种标准化的报告方法?
已经制定了个体核心结局、情境陈述和标准化报告表的共识定义。
不孕症的个体核心结局存在不同的定义。这种差异增加了研究人员进行选择性结局报告的机会,这破坏了二次研究并损害了临床实践指南的制定。
研究设计、规模、持续时间:通过系统审查定义制定举措和临床实践指南,以及审查 Cochrane 妇科和生育组指南,确定了潜在的定义。这些定义在面对面的共识制定会议上进行了讨论,会议达成了共识定义。作为该过程的一部分,还制定了标准化的报告方法。
参与者/材料、设置、方法:医疗保健专业人员、研究人员和有生育问题的人通过使用正式的共识制定方法聚集在一起,该方法是公开和透明的。
在四项定义制定举措中,包括哈尔滨共识会议工作组和国际监测辅助生殖技术委员会、12 项临床实践指南和 Cochrane 妇科和生育组指南,共确定了 44 项潜在定义。来自 11 个国家的 27 名参与者为共识制定会议做出了贡献。成功为所有核心结局制定了共识定义。还提出了具体建议,以改善报告。
局限性、谨慎的原因:我们使用了共识制定方法,该方法具有内在的局限性。来自中低收入国家的代表性有限。
最小数据集应有助于研究人员填充方案、病例报告表和其他数据收集工具。通用报告表应向研究人员提供明确的指导,并在期刊出版物和会议演讲中提高他们报告结果的能力。研究资助机构、标准议定书项目:干预试验建议声明以及 80 多个专业期刊已承诺实施这一核心结局集。
研究资金/利益冲突:这项研究由新西兰皇家学会的 Catalyst 基金、奥克兰医学研究基金和 Maurice 和 Phyllis Paykel 信托资助。Siladitya Bhattacharya 报告担任 Human Reproduction Open 的主编和 Cochrane 妇科和生育组的编辑。J.L.H.E. 报告担任 Human Reproduction 的前任编辑。R.S.L. 报告称自己是 Abbvie、Bayer、Ferring、Fractyl、Insud Pharma 和 Kindex 的顾问费以及 Guerbet 和 Hass Avocado Board 的研究赞助费。B.W.M. 报告称自己是 Guerbet、iGenomix、Merck、Merck KGaA 和 ObsEva 的顾问费。C.N. 报告担任 Fertility and Sterility 的主编和 Journal of Urology 的部分编辑,收到过来自 Ferring 的研究赞助,并在 NexHand 拥有财务利益。E.H.Y.N. 报告称自己收到过 Merck 的研究赞助。A.S. 报告称自己是 Guerbet 的顾问。J.W. 报告是 Cochrane 妇科和生育组的统计编辑。A.V. 报告称自己是 Cochrane 妇科和生育评论组以及 Reproduction 杂志的统计编辑。他的雇主机构因对证据进行审查以告知其“红绿灯”系统而从人类受精和胚胎管理局获得报酬,该系统用于治疗“附加物”的不孕症。N.L.V. 报告称自己有 Ferring、Merck 和 Merck Sharp and Dohme 的咨询费和会议费。其余作者均声明与提交的工作无利益冲突。所有作者均已完成披露表。
有效性试验核心结局措施倡议:1023。