Van’t Hooft et al. A core outcome set for evaluation of interventions to prevent preterm birth
Why should you read about this topic?
Consistency of reporting outcomes should yield more readable and relevant research
What were the authors trying to do?
To develop a consensus on a set of outcomes relevant to clinical research, systematic reviews, and guidelines on prevention of preterm birth
Who participated and in what setting?
Members (N=228) of 5 stakeholder groups (parents, midwives, obstetricians, neonatologists, and researchers) from middle and high income countries
What was the study design?
Two-stage web-based Delphi survey and a face-to-face meeting to develop consensus on a set of outcomes.
What were the main outcome measures?
9-point Likert scale of importance
What were the results?
Consensus was achieved on 4 maternal outcomes (maternal mortality, maternal infection or inflammation, prelabor rupture of membranes, and harm to mother from intervention). Consensus was also achieved with 9 neonatal outcomes (gestational age at birth, perinatal mortality, birth weight, early neurodevelopmental morbidity, late neurodevelopmental morbidity, gastrointestinal morbidity, infection, respiratory morbidity and harm to offspring from intervention.
What is the most interesting image in the paper?
What were the study strengths and weaknesses?
Strengths: objective approach to identifying a set of core outcomes. Weaknesses: unclear plan for implementation
What does the study contribute for your practice?
A core outcomes set for prevention of preterm birth will enable comparison and combination of data from clinical trials