1
|
Monga S, Andrei S, Quinn RC, Khudiakova V, Desai R, Srirangan A, Patel S, Szatmari P, Butcher NJ, Krause KR, Courtney DB, Offringa M, Elsman EBM. Systematic Review: Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used to Measure Depression Symptom Severity in Adolescents With Depression. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2024:S0890-8567(24)01318-2. [PMID: 39151790 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2024.06.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2023] [Revised: 06/21/2024] [Accepted: 08/07/2024] [Indexed: 08/19/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To systematically evaluate the measurement properties of 12 patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression. Depression symptom severity was chosen as the outcome of focus given its importance as an outcome to measure in adolescents with depression across clinical trials and/or care. METHOD MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from year of inception up to December 7, 2023. Study appraisal (ie, risk of bias), evaluation of measurement properties, and evidence synthesis followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Included studies evaluated at least 1 of 9 measurement properties as detailed in the COSMIN taxonomy within a reported sample or subgroup of youth ages 12 to 24 years, with at least 40% meeting criteria for any depressive disorder. RESULTS Of the 15,560 records identified, 31 studies for 7 PROMs were included in the COSMIN appraisal. Although several PROMs have the potential to accurately measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression, at this time none of the PROMs can be recommended for use without further evaluative work. High-quality evidence was generally lacking, largely due to few or inconsistent findings, small sample sizes, and other methodological concerns. CONCLUSION This systematic review of the measurement properties of 12 PROMs used to measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression found that none of the PROMs can be recommended for use until further evaluative work is conducted. Clinicians and researchers should proceed with caution when using these PROMs. DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION STATEMENT One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented sexual and/or gender groups in science. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suneeta Monga
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Sorina Andrei
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | - Riddhi Desai
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Sneha Patel
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Peter Szatmari
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nancy J Butcher
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Karolin R Krause
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Darren B Courtney
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Martin Offringa
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ellen B M Elsman
- Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Peng S, Meng L, Fang R, Shen Q, Tian Y, Xiong A, Li S, Yang Y, Chang W, Ni J, Zhu W. Current state of research on exercise for the treatment of myasthenia gravis: A scoping review. Complement Ther Med 2024; 81:103033. [PMID: 38458542 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2024.103033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2023] [Revised: 03/03/2024] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 03/10/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To provide a comprehensive overview of existing evidence, research gaps, and future research priorities concerning the treatment of myasthenia gravis (MG) using exercise therapies. METHOD Clinical studies on exercise treatment for MG were searched in nine databases to conduct a scoping review. Two independent researchers screened the literature and comprehensively analyzed the characteristics and limitations of the included articles. RESULTS A total of 5725 studies were retrieved, of which 24 were included. The included studies were conducted in 16 different countries/regions and 456 patients were enrolled. Study designs included both interventional and observational studies. Exercise interventions included aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, balance training, and stretch training, and are typically administered in conjunction with medication, usual care, or some other interventions. The intensity, frequency, and duration of exercise interventions varied hugely among studies. Six-minute walk test, adverse events, muscle strength, MG quality of life-15 scale, forced vital capacity, quantitative MG scale, and MG activities of daily living scale were the most frequently used outcomes. All studies reported results in favor of the efficacy and safety of exercise in MG, and exercise-related adverse events were reported in two studies. CONCLUSION This scoping review provides an overview of the evidence concerning exercise treatment for MG. Key gaps in evidence include a limited number of participants, complex interventions, variability in outcome selection, and insufficient reporting in publications. The promotion of exercise treatment for MG still encounters several obstacles. A larger population, rigorous study design and conduction, standardized interventions and outcomes, and standardized reporting are essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siyang Peng
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Linghao Meng
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Ruiying Fang
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Qiqi Shen
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Yukun Tian
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Anni Xiong
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Shaohong Li
- Treatment Center of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing Bo'ai Hospital, China Rehabilitation Research Center, Beijing, China
| | - Yajing Yang
- Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Yuyuantan Community Health Center, Beijing, China
| | - Weiqian Chang
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine Ji'nan Hospital (Ji'nan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine), Shandong, China
| | - Jinxia Ni
- Department of Acupuncture, Dongzhimen Hospital of Beijing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Wenzeng Zhu
- Department of Acupuncture, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Butcher NJ, Monsour A, Mew EJ, Chan AW, Moher D, Mayo-Wilson E, Terwee CB, Chee-A-Tow A, Baba A, Gavin F, Grimshaw JM, Kelly LE, Saeed L, Thabane L, Askie L, Smith M, Farid-Kapadia M, Williamson PR, Szatmari P, Tugwell P, Golub RM, Monga S, Vohra S, Marlin S, Ungar WJ, Offringa M. Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Reports: The CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 Extension. JAMA 2022; 328:2252-2264. [PMID: 36511921 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.21022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 168] [Impact Index Per Article: 84.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Clinicians, patients, and policy makers rely on published results from clinical trials to help make evidence-informed decisions. To critically evaluate and use trial results, readers require complete and transparent information regarding what was planned, done, and found. Specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be reported in publications of clinical trials is needed to reduce deficient reporting practices that obscure issues with outcome selection, assessment, and analysis. OBJECTIVE To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for reporting outcomes in clinical trial reports through integration with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement. EVIDENCE REVIEW Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for the reporting of outcomes in clinical trial reports. FINDINGS The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 128 recommendations relevant to reporting outcomes in trial reports, the majority (83%) of which were not included in the CONSORT 2010 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 64 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 30 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 17 items that elaborate on the CONSORT 2010 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the trial outcomes, including how and when they were assessed (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 6a), defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups during sample size calculations (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 7a), describing the statistical methods used to compare groups for the primary and secondary outcomes (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 12a), and describing the prespecified analyses and any outcome analyses not prespecified (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 18). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement provides 17 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all published clinical trial reports and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy J Butcher
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrea Monsour
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Emma J Mew
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - An-Wen Chan
- Department of Medicine, Women's College Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - David Moher
- Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Evan Mayo-Wilson
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
| | - Caroline B Terwee
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Methodology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Alyssandra Chee-A-Tow
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ami Baba
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Frank Gavin
- public panel member, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jeremy M Grimshaw
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lauren E Kelly
- Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
- Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
| | - Leena Saeed
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lehana Thabane
- Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lisa Askie
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Mufiza Farid-Kapadia
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Paula R Williamson
- MRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, England
| | - Peter Szatmari
- Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Peter Tugwell
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robert M Golub
- Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Suneeta Monga
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sunita Vohra
- Departments of Pediatrics and Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Susan Marlin
- Clinical Trials Ontario, Toronto, Canada
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Wendy J Ungar
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Martin Offringa
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Neonatology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Krause KR, Chung S, Sousa Fialho MDL, Szatmari P, Wolpert M. The challenge of ensuring affordability, sustainability, consistency, and adaptability in the common metrics agenda. Lancet Psychiatry 2021; 8:1094-1102. [PMID: 34656284 DOI: 10.1016/s2215-0366(21)00122-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2021] [Revised: 03/05/2021] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Mental health research grapples with research waste and stunted field progression caused by inconsistent outcome measurement across studies and clinical settings, which means there is no common language for considering findings. Although recognising that no gold standard measures exist and that all existing measures are flawed in one way or another, anxiety and depression research is spearheading a common metrics movement to harmonise measurement, with several initiatives over the past 5 years recommending the consistent use of specific scales to allow read-across of measurements between studies. For this approach to flourish, however, common metrics must be acceptable and adaptable to a range of contexts and populations, and global access should be as easy and affordable as possible, including in low-income countries. Within a measurement landscape dominated by fixed proprietary measures and with competing views of what should be measured, achieving this goal poses a range of challenges. In this Personal View, we consider tensions between affordability, sustainability, consistency, and adaptability that, if not addressed, risk undermining the common metrics agenda. We outline a three-pronged way forward that involves funders taking more direct responsibility for measure development and dissemination; a move towards managing measure dissemination and adaptation via open-access measure hubs; and transitioning from fixed questionnaires to item banks. We argue that now is the time to start thinking of mental health metrics as 21st century tools to be co-owned and co-created by the mental health community, with support from dedicated infrastructure, coordinating bodies, and funders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karolin Rose Krause
- Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada; Research Department for Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
| | | | | | - Peter Szatmari
- Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, ON, Canada; Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Miranda Wolpert
- Research Department for Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK; Wellcome Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Courtney DB, Watson P, Chan BW, Bennett K, Krause KR, Offringa M, Butcher NJ, Monga S, Neprily K, Zentner T, Rodak T, Szatmari P. Forks in the road: Definitions of response, remission, recovery, and other dichotomized outcomes in randomized controlled trials for adolescent depression. A scoping review. Depress Anxiety 2021; 38:1152-1168. [PMID: 34312952 DOI: 10.1002/da.23200] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2020] [Revised: 06/18/2021] [Accepted: 06/24/2021] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Definitions of dichotomous outcome terms, such as "response," "remission," and "recovery" are central to the design, interpretation, and clinical application of randomized controlled trials of adolescent depression interventions. Accordingly, this scoping review was conducted to document how these terms have been defined and justified in clinical trials. METHOD Bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and CINAHL were searched from inception to February 2020 for randomized controlled trials evaluating treatments for adolescent depression. Ninety-eight trials were included for data extraction and analysis. RESULTS Assessment of outcome measurement instruments, metric strategies, methods of aggregation, and measurement timing, yielded 53 unique outcome definitions of "response" across 45 trials that assessed response, 47 unique definitions of "remission" in 29 trials that assessed remission, and 19 unique definitions of "recovery" across 11 trials that assessed recovery. A minority of trials (N = 35) provided a rationale for dichotomous outcomes definitions, often by citing other studies that used a similar definition (N = 11). No rationale included input from youth or families with lived experience. CONCLUSION Our review revealed that definitions of "response," "remission," "recovery," and related terms are highly variable, lack clear rationales, and are not informed by key stakeholder input. These limitations impair pooling of trial results and the incorporation of trial findings into pragmatic treatment decisions in clinical practice. Systematic approaches to establishing outcome definitions are needed to enhance the impact of trials examining adolescent depression treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Darren B Courtney
- Department of Psychiatry, Child and Youth Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Priya Watson
- Department of Psychiatry, Child and Youth Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | | | - Kathryn Bennett
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (formerly Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics), McMaster Univeristy, Toronto, Ontario
| | | | - Martin Offringa
- Department of Pediatrics, Neonatology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Nancy J Butcher
- Department of Psychiatry, Child and Youth Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Suneeta Monga
- Department of Psychiatry, Child and Youth Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Kirsten Neprily
- Department of Psychology, School and Applied Child Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
| | - Tabitha Zentner
- Margaret and Wallace McCain Centre for Child, Youth and Family Mental Health, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Terri Rodak
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Peter Szatmari
- Department of Psychiatry, Child and Youth Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Core Outcome Set Development for Adolescent Major Depressive Disorder Clinical Trials: A Registered Report. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2020; 59:1297-1298. [PMID: 33126995 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2020.07.905] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2020] [Revised: 07/03/2020] [Accepted: 07/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
7
|
Mew EJ, Monsour A, Saeed L, Santos L, Patel S, Courtney DB, Watson PN, Szatmari P, Offringa M, Monga S, Butcher NJ. Systematic scoping review identifies heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent depression clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2020; 126:71-79. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2020] [Revised: 05/15/2020] [Accepted: 06/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
8
|
Response to "Trials for depressive disorder in adolescents: the emperor's new clothes," a letter to the editor by Alain Braillon, MD, PhD. J Clin Epidemiol 2020; 128:159-161. [PMID: 32860976 PMCID: PMC7449977 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2020] [Accepted: 08/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
|
9
|
Monsour A, Mew EJ, Patel S, Chee-A-Tow A, Saeed L, Santos L, Courtney DB, Watson PN, Monga S, Szatmari P, Offringa M, Butcher NJ. Primary outcome reporting in adolescent depression clinical trials needs standardization. BMC Med Res Methodol 2020; 20:129. [PMID: 32450810 PMCID: PMC7247139 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-020-01019-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2020] [Accepted: 05/18/2020] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence-based health care is informed by results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their syntheses in meta-analyses. When the trial outcomes measured are not clearly described in trial publications, knowledge synthesis, translation, and decision-making may be impeded. While heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD) RCTs has been described, the comprehensiveness of outcome reporting is unknown. This study aimed to assess the reporting of primary outcomes in RCTs evaluating treatments for adolescent MDD. METHODS RCTs evaluating treatment interventions in adolescents with a diagnosis of MDD published between 2008 and 2017 specifying a single primary outcome were eligible for outcome reporting assessment. Outcome reporting assessment was done independently in duplicate using a comprehensive checklist of 58 reporting items. Primary outcome information provided in each RCT publication was scored as "fully reported", "partially reported", or "not reported" for each checklist item, as applicable. RESULTS Eighteen of 42 identified articles were found to have a discernable single primary outcome and were included for outcome reporting assessment. Most trials (72%) did not fully report on over half of the 58 checklist items. Items describing masking of outcome assessors, timing and frequency of outcome assessment, and outcome analyses were fully reported in over 70% of trials. Items less frequently reported included outcome measurement instrument properties (ranging from 6 to 17%), justification of timing and frequency of outcome assessment (6%), and justification of criteria used for clinically significant differences (17%). The overall comprehensiveness of reporting appeared stable over time. CONCLUSIONS Heterogeneous reporting exists in published adolescent MDD RCTs, with frequent omissions of key details about their primary outcomes. These omissions may impair interpretability, replicability, and synthesis of RCTs that inform clinical guidelines and decision-making in this field. Consensus on the minimal criteria for outcome reporting in adolescent MDD RCTs is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Monsour
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| | - Emma J Mew
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| | - Sagar Patel
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| | - Alyssandra Chee-A-Tow
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| | - Leena Saeed
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| | - Lucia Santos
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| | - Darren B Courtney
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Priya N Watson
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Suneeta Monga
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - Peter Szatmari
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - Martin Offringa
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada.
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
- Division of Neonatology, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Nancy J Butcher
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, 686 Bay Street, Room 11.9712, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada
| |
Collapse
|