Corresponding Author: Nancy J. Butcher, PhD, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay St, Toronto, ON M5G 0A4, Canada (email@example.com).
Accepted for Publication: October 25, 2022.
Author Contributions: Dr Butcher had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Concept and design: All authors.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
Drafting of the manuscript: Butcher.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
Statistical analysis: Monsour.
Obtained funding: Offringa.
Administrative, technical, or material support: Monsour, Mew, Baba.
Supervision: Butcher, Offringa.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Butcher reported receiving grant funding from CHILD-BRIGHT and the Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) and receiving personal fees from Nobias Therapeutics. Ms Mew reported receiving salary support through a Canadian Institutes of Health Research doctoral foreign study award. Dr Kelly reported receiving funding from the Canadian Cancer Society, Research Manitoba, the Children’s Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba, Mitacs, and the SickKids Foundation. Dr Askie reported being a co-convenor of the Cochrane Prospective Meta-Analysis Methods Group. Dr Farid-Kapadia reported currently being an employee of Hoffmann La-Roche and holding shares in the company. Dr Williamson reported chairing the COMET initiative management group. Dr Szatmari reported receiving funding from the CAMH. Dr Tugwell reported co-chairing the OMERACT executive committee; receiving personal fees from the Reformulary Group, UCB Pharma GmbH, Parexel International, PRA Health Sciences, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Roche, Genzyme, Sanofi, Horizon Therapeutics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, PPD Inc, QuintilesIMS (now IQVIA), Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Savient Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Forest Pharmaceuticals, and Bioiberica; serving on data and safety monitoring boards for UCB Pharma GmbH, Parexel International, and PRA Health Sciences; and receiving unrestricted educational grants from the American College of Rheumatology and the European League of Rheumatology. Dr Monga reported receiving funding from the Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression at CAMH; receiving royalties from Springer for Assessing and Treating Anxiety Disorders in Young Children; and receiving personal fees from the TD Bank Financial Group for serving as a chair in child and adolescent psychiatry. Dr Ungar reported being supported by the Canada research chair in economic evaluation and technology assessment in child health. No other disclosures were reported.
Funding/Support: This work, project 148953, received financial support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (supported the work of Drs Butcher, Kelly, Szatmari, Monga, and Offringa and Mss Saeed and Marlin).
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Disclaimers: Dr Golub is Executive Deputy Editor of JAMA, but he was not involved in any of the decisions regarding review of the manuscript or its acceptance. This article reflects the views of the authors, the Delphi panelists, and the consensus meeting panelists and may not represent the views of the broader stakeholder groups, the authors’ institutions, or other affiliations.
Additional Contributions: We gratefully acknowledge the additional contributions made by the project core team, the executive team, the operations team, the Delphi panelists, and the international consensus meeting panelists (eAppendix 3 in the Supplement). We thank Andrea Chiaramida, BA, for administrative project support and Lisa Stallwood, MSc, for administrative manuscript support (both with The Hospital for Sick Children). We thank Petros Pechlivanoglou, PhD, and Robin Hayeems, PhD, for piloting and providing feedback on the format of the Delphi survey (both with The Hospital for Sick Children). We thank Roger F. Soll, MD (Cochrane Neonatal and the Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Larner College of Medicine, University of Vermont), and James Webbe, MB BChir, PhD, and Chris Gale, MBBS, PhD (both with Neonatal Medicine, School of Public Health, Imperial College London), for pilot testing the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension checklist. None of these individuals received compensation for their role in the study.
Additional Information: The project materials and data are publicly available on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/arwy8/.
COSMIN. Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) is an initiative of an international multidisciplinary team of researchers. Accessed April 13, 2021. https://www.cosmin.nl/
JM , Sperna Weiland
NH , Hollmann
MW , Repping
S , Hermanides
J . High incidence of outcome switching observed in follow-up publications of randomized controlled trials: meta-research study. J Clin Epidemiol
. 2021;137:236-240. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.003PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
E , Fusco
N , Li
T , Hong
H , Canner
JK , Dickersin
K ; MUDS investigators. Multiple outcomes and analyses in clinical trials create challenges for interpretation and research synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol
. 2017;86:39-50. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.007PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
S , Offringa
M , Butcher
NJ , Szatmari
P . From research to practice: the importance of appropriate outcome selection, measurement, and reporting in pediatric mental health research. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
. 2020;59(4):497-500. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2019.08.468PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
M , Blazeby
J , Altman
DG , Revicki
DA , Moher
D , Brundage
MD ; CONSORT PRO Group. Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. JAMA
. 2013;309(8):814-822. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.879PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
NJ , Monsour
A , Mew
et al. Improving outcome reporting in clinical trial reports and protocols: study protocol for the Instrument for reporting Planned Endpoints in Clinical Trials (InsPECT). Trials
. 2019;20(1):161. doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3248-0PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
NJ , Monsour
A , Mew
et al. Guidelines for reporting outcomes in trial protocols: the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension. JAMA
. Published online December 13, 2022. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.21243Google Scholar
NJ , Mew
EJ , Saeed
et al. Guidance for reporting outcomes in clinical trials: scoping review protocol. BMJ Open
. 2019;9(2):e023001. PubMedGoogle Scholar
TC , Glasziou
PP , Boutron
et al. Better reporting of interventions: Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ
. 2014;348:g1687. doi:10.1136/bmj.g1687PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
G , Schwartz
L , Woloshin
S , Bae
H , Gøtzsche
PC . Definition, reporting, and interpretation of composite outcomes in clinical trials: systematic review. BMJ
. 2010;341:c3920. doi:10.1136/bmj.c3920PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
JA , Hislop
J , Adewuyi
et al. Assessing methods to specify the target difference for a randomised controlled trial: DELTA (Difference ELicitation in TriAls) review. Health Technol Assess
. 2014;18(28). doi:10.3310/hta18280Google ScholarCrossref
HC , Beckerman
H , Terwee
CB , Terluin
B , Bouter
LM . Definition of clinical differences. J Rheumatol
. 2006;33(2):434-435.PubMedGoogle Scholar
S , Dutton
S , Yu
LM , Chan
AW , Altman
DG . The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ
. 2010;340:c723. doi:10.1136/bmj.c723PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
LB , Terwee
CB , Patrick
et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol
. 2010;63(7):737-745. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
HCW , Terwee
CB , Mokkink
LB , Knol
DL . Measurement in Medicine
. Cambridge University Press; 2011. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511996214
JA , Julious
SA , Sones
et al. Practical help for specifying the target difference in sample size calculations for RCTs: the DELTA2
five-stage study, including a workshop. Health Technol Assess
. 2019;23(60):1-88. doi:10.3310/hta23600PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
JA , Julious
SA , Sones
et al. DELTA2
guidance on choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial. BMJ
. 2018;363:k3750-k3750. doi:10.1136/bmj.k3750PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
D , Bangdiwala
S , Walsh
et al. Patient reported outcome measures in clinical trials should be initially analyzed as continuous outcomes for statistical significance and responder analyses should be reserved as secondary analyses. J Clin Epidemiol
. 2021;134:95-102. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.01.026PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
RL , Duan
N ; DEcIDE Methods Center N-of-1 Guidance Panel, eds. Design and Implementation of N-of-1 Trials: A User’s Guide. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014.
P , Hardouin
JB , Lehur
PA , Meurette
G , Vanier
A . Practical issues encountered while determining minimal clinically important difference in patient-reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes
. 2020;18(1):156. doi:10.1186/s12955-020-01398-wPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Y , Jouve
E , Castelli
C , Gentile
S . How is the minimal clinically important difference established in health-related quality of life instruments? review of anchors and methods. Health Qual Life Outcomes
. 2020;18(1):136. doi:10.1186/s12955-020-01344-wPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
NJ , Mew
E , Monsour
et al. A scoping review of outcome-reporting recommendations for clinical trial protocols and reports. Accessed April 26, 2022. https://osf.io/6f5x7/
JM , Kulgar
M , Ding
et al. Diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews. In: Aromataris
EMZ , ed. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis
. JBI; 2020. doi:10.46658/JBIMES-20-10
EA , Briel
M , You
et al. Potential impact on estimated treatment effects of information lost to follow-up in randomised controlled trials (LOST-IT): systematic review. BMJ
. 2012;344:e2809. doi:10.1136/bmj.e2809PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
I , Rivero-Arias
O , Gray
AM , Jenkinson
C , Burke
Ó . The current practice of handling and reporting missing outcome data in eight widely used PROMs in RCT publications: a review of the current literature. Qual Life Res
. 2016;25(7):1613-1623. doi:10.1007/s11136-015-1206-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
National Research Council (US) Panel on Handling Missing Data in Clinical Trials. The Prevention and Treatment of Missing Data in Clinical Trials
. National Academies Press; 2010. doi:10.17226/12955
DL . Guidelines for presenting tables and figures in scientific manuscripts. In: Moher
D , Altman
DG , Schulz
KF , Simera
I , Wager
E , eds. Guidelines for Reporting Health Research: A User’s Manual
. Wiley; 2014. doi:10.1002/9781118715598.ch26