Core Outcome Measures for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors. An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
- Teacher spread
- 0.004 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
RATIONALE: Research evaluating acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors' outcomes after hospital discharge has substantial heterogeneity in terms of the measurement instruments used, creating barriers to synthesizing study data. OBJECTIVES: To identify a minimum set of core outcome measures that are essential to include in all clinical research studies evaluating ARF survivors after discharge. METHODS: We conducted a three-round modified Delphi consensus process with 77 participants (47% female, 55% outside the United States), including clinical researchers from more than 16 countries across six continents, patients/caregivers, clinicians, and research funders. Participants reviewed standardized information on measure instruments for seven consensus-derived outcomes plus one recommended outcome. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Response rates were 91 to 97% across the three rounds. Among 75 measurement instruments evaluated, the following met a priori consensus criteria: EQ-5D and 36-item Short Form Health Survey version 2 (optional) for the "satisfaction with life and personal enjoyment" and "pain" outcomes, and both the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Impact of Events Scale-Revised for the "mental health" outcome. No measures reached consensus for the following outcomes: cognition, muscle and/or nerve function, physical function, and pulmonary function. All measures considered for pulmonary function met consensus criteria for exclusion. The following measures did not reach the threshold for consensus but achieved the highest scores for their respective outcomes: the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (cognition), manual muscle testing and handgrip dynamometry (muscle and/or nerve function), and 6-minute-walk test (physical function). CONCLUSIONS: This Core Outcome Measurement Set is recommended for use in all clinical research evaluating ARF survivors after hospital discharge. In the future, researchers should evaluate measures for outcomes not reaching consensus.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
The record
- Venue
- American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
- Topic
- Delphi Technique in Research
- Field
- Social Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- —
- Funders
- National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
- Keywords
- MedicinePhysical therapyDelphi methodAnxietyPatient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information SystemCognitionMEDLINEPhysical medicine and rehabilitationClinical psychologyPsychometricsPsychiatryComputerized adaptive testing
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes