SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Core outcome sets in medical research
8 references·0 citing·32 second hopsampled
Core outcome sets in medical research (2022)Core outcome sets in medical researchA systematic review finds Core Outcome Set uptake varies widely across different areas of health (2020)A systematic review finds Cor…Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 5th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research (2019)Choosing important health out…The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017)The COMET Handbook: version 1…Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations (2017)Core Outcome Set-STAndards fo…A methodological approach for assessing the uptake of core outcome sets using ClinicalTrials.gov: findings from a review of randomised controlled trials of rheumatoid arthritis (2017)A methodological approach for…How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline (2016)How to select outcome measure…Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider (2012)Developing core outcome sets …Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence (2009)Avoidable waste in the produc…Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations (2003)Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias (2008)The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study (2010)The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument (2016)Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts (2007)What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? (2008)Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014)Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): Explanation and Elaboration (2015)Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires (2006)The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes (2010)COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (2018)COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study (2018)SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials (2013)Core Outcome Set–STAndards for Reporting: The COS-STAR Statement (2016)Instrument Selection Using the OMERACT Filter 2.1: The OMERACT Methodology (2019)Core Outcome Measures for Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (COMPAC): a modified Delphi process to develop a core outcome set for trials in perioperative care and anaesthesia (2021)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (2014)A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery (2017)COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures version 2.0 (2024)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Updated recommendations for the Cochrane rapid review methods guidance for rapid reviews of effectiveness (2024)Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses (2007)CORE-IBD: A Multidisciplinary International Consensus Initiative to Develop a Core Outcome Set for Randomized Controlled Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (2022)CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025)Higher number of items associated with significantly lower response rates in COS Delphi surveys (2018)Core Outcome Set-STAndardised Protocol Items: the COS-STAP Statement (2019)Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Protocols (2022)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2009Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence2,207 cited
  • 2017The COMET Handbook: version 1.02,021 cited
  • 2012Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider1,659 cited
  • 2016How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline1,144 cited
  • 2017Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations802 cited
  • 2017A methodological approach for assessing the uptake of core outcome sets using ClinicalTrials.gov: findings from a review of randomised controlled trials of rheumatoid arthritis146 cited
  • 2019Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 5th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research144 cited
  • 2020A systematic review finds Core Outcome Set uptake varies widely across different areas of health125 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work