Abstract

BackgroundCochrane reviewers are strongly encouraged to evaluate the quality of evidence for the most important outcomes by using the GRADE approach and to report these results in a Summary of Findings (SoF) table. We aimed to assess whether outcomes reported in the SoF table of Cochrane reviews could be considered patient-important outcomes (PIOs) and the quality of the available evidence for these outcomes.MethodsWe performed a methodological review of Cochrane reviews published between March 2011 and September 2014. For a random sample of Cochrane reviews reporting a SoF table, we extracted all outcomes reported in this table and evaluated whether they could be considered PIOs (i.e., mortality, other clinical events, adverse events, function, pain, quality of life and therapeutic decisions). Then, we collected the quality of evidence for every outcome in these SoF tables.ResultsWe included 290 reviews issued by 47 of the 53 Cochrane Review Groups. Every SoF table included a median of 5 outcomes, for a total of 1414 outcomes; 1089 (77%) could be considered PIOs. Almost all reviews (n = 278, 96%) included at least one PIO in their SoF table. The quality of evidence for the outcomes was high for 12% (n = 168), moderate for 28% (n = 402) and low or very low for 45% (n = 640). Less than one quarter of reviews (n = 63) included at least one PIO with high-quality evidence that favoured a benefit of the experimental intervention evaluated in half of them (n = 34 reviews).ConclusionsMany outcomes reported in the SoF table of recent Cochrane reviews can be considered PIOs. However, the quality of available evidence remains limited for these outcomes.

Highlights

  • In the last decade, clinicians and researchers have been encouraged to recommend healthcare interventions based on their effect on patient-important outcomes (PIOs) such as death, other clinical events, quality of life or functional outcomes[1,2,3,4,5,6]

  • Every Summary of Findings (SoF) table included a median of 5 outcomes, for a total of 1414 outcomes; 1089 (77%) could be considered PIOs

  • Many outcomes reported in the SoF table of recent Cochrane reviews can be considered PIOs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Clinicians and researchers have been encouraged to recommend healthcare interventions based on their effect on patient-important outcomes (PIOs) such as death, other clinical events, quality of life or functional outcomes[1,2,3,4,5,6]. In a recent report assessing trials of critically ill patients, less than one quarter of primary outcomes (24%) were PIOs[9]. This proportion was as low as 5% when exploring outcomes besides mortality after intensive care unit discharge, such as functional disability or quality of life[9]. Cochrane reviewers are strongly encouraged to evaluate the quality of evidence for the most important outcomes by using the GRADE approach and to report these results in a Summary of Findings (SoF) table. We aimed to assess whether outcomes reported in the SoF table of Cochrane reviews could be considered patient-important outcomes (PIOs) and the quality of the available evidence for these outcomes

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call