开发盆腔器官脱垂技术协调登记网络。

IF 2.1 Q2 SURGERY BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies Pub Date : 2022-11-11 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000076
Courtney E Baird, Bilal Chughtai, Catherine S Bradley, Kathleen Kobashi, Mary Jung, Art Sedrakyan, Sharon Andrews, Ann Ferriter, Terri Cornelison, Danica Marinac-Dabic
{"title":"开发盆腔器官脱垂技术协调登记网络。","authors":"Courtney E Baird, Bilal Chughtai, Catherine S Bradley, Kathleen Kobashi, Mary Jung, Art Sedrakyan, Sharon Andrews, Ann Ferriter, Terri Cornelison, Danica Marinac-Dabic","doi":"10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The accumulation of data through a prospective, multicenter Coordinated Registry Network (CRN) could be a robust and cost-effective way to gather real-world evidence on the performance of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) technologies for device-based and intervention-based studies. To develop the CRN, a group of POP experts consisting of representatives from professional societies, the Food and Drug Administration, academia, industry, and the patient community, was convened to discuss the role and feasibility of the CRN and to identify the core data elements important to assess POP technologies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A Delphi method approach was employed to achieve consensus on a core minimum dataset for the CRN. A series of surveys were sent to the panel and answered by each expert anonymously and individually. Results from the surveys were collected, collated, and analyzed by the study design team from Weill Cornell Medicine. Questions for the next round were based on the analysis process and discussed with group members via conference call. This process was repeated twice over a 6-month time period during which consensus was achieved.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one experts participated in the effort and proposed 120 data elements. Participation rates in the first and second round of the Delphi survey were 95.2% and 71.4%, respectively. The working group reached final consensus among responders on 90 data elements capturing relevant general medical and surgical history, procedure and discharge, short-term and long-term follow-up, device factors, and surgery and surgeon factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CRN successfully developed a set of core data elements to support the study of POP technologies through convening an expert panel on POP technologies and using the Delphi method. These standardized data elements have the potential to influence patient and provider decisions about treatments and include important outcomes related to efficacy and safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":33349,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c7/1e/bmjsit-2020-000076.PMC9660621.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of a coordinated registry network for pelvic organ prolapse technologies.\",\"authors\":\"Courtney E Baird, Bilal Chughtai, Catherine S Bradley, Kathleen Kobashi, Mary Jung, Art Sedrakyan, Sharon Andrews, Ann Ferriter, Terri Cornelison, Danica Marinac-Dabic\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000076\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The accumulation of data through a prospective, multicenter Coordinated Registry Network (CRN) could be a robust and cost-effective way to gather real-world evidence on the performance of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) technologies for device-based and intervention-based studies. To develop the CRN, a group of POP experts consisting of representatives from professional societies, the Food and Drug Administration, academia, industry, and the patient community, was convened to discuss the role and feasibility of the CRN and to identify the core data elements important to assess POP technologies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A Delphi method approach was employed to achieve consensus on a core minimum dataset for the CRN. A series of surveys were sent to the panel and answered by each expert anonymously and individually. Results from the surveys were collected, collated, and analyzed by the study design team from Weill Cornell Medicine. Questions for the next round were based on the analysis process and discussed with group members via conference call. This process was repeated twice over a 6-month time period during which consensus was achieved.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one experts participated in the effort and proposed 120 data elements. Participation rates in the first and second round of the Delphi survey were 95.2% and 71.4%, respectively. The working group reached final consensus among responders on 90 data elements capturing relevant general medical and surgical history, procedure and discharge, short-term and long-term follow-up, device factors, and surgery and surgeon factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CRN successfully developed a set of core data elements to support the study of POP technologies through convening an expert panel on POP technologies and using the Delphi method. These standardized data elements have the potential to influence patient and provider decisions about treatments and include important outcomes related to efficacy and safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c7/1e/bmjsit-2020-000076.PMC9660621.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000076\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Surgery Interventions Health Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:通过前瞻性多中心协调注册网络(CRN)积累数据,可以成为一种稳健且具有成本效益的方法,为基于设备和干预的研究收集有关盆腔器官脱垂(POP)技术性能的真实证据。为了开发 CRN,我们召集了一个由专业协会、食品与药物管理局、学术界、工业界和患者社区代表组成的 POP 专家小组,讨论 CRN 的作用和可行性,并确定对评估 POP 技术非常重要的核心数据元素:设计:采用德尔菲法就 CRN 的最低核心数据集达成共识。我们向专家小组发送了一系列调查问卷,每位专家都匿名并单独作答。威尔康奈尔医学院的研究设计团队对调查结果进行了收集、整理和分析。下一轮的问题是根据分析过程提出的,并通过电话会议与小组成员讨论。这一过程在 6 个月的时间内重复了两次,并在此期间达成了共识:结果:21 位专家参与了这项工作,并提出了 120 个数据元素。第一轮和第二轮德尔菲调查的参与率分别为 95.2% 和 71.4%。工作组在90个数据元素上达成了最终共识,这些数据元素包括相关的一般病史和手术史、手术过程和出院情况、短期和长期随访、设备因素以及手术和外科医生因素:通过召集 POP 技术专家小组并使用德尔菲法,CRN 成功开发了一套支持 POP 技术研究的核心数据元素。这些标准化的数据元素有可能影响患者和医疗服务提供者对治疗方法的决策,并包括与疗效和安全性相关的重要结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Development of a coordinated registry network for pelvic organ prolapse technologies.

Objectives: The accumulation of data through a prospective, multicenter Coordinated Registry Network (CRN) could be a robust and cost-effective way to gather real-world evidence on the performance of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) technologies for device-based and intervention-based studies. To develop the CRN, a group of POP experts consisting of representatives from professional societies, the Food and Drug Administration, academia, industry, and the patient community, was convened to discuss the role and feasibility of the CRN and to identify the core data elements important to assess POP technologies.

Design: A Delphi method approach was employed to achieve consensus on a core minimum dataset for the CRN. A series of surveys were sent to the panel and answered by each expert anonymously and individually. Results from the surveys were collected, collated, and analyzed by the study design team from Weill Cornell Medicine. Questions for the next round were based on the analysis process and discussed with group members via conference call. This process was repeated twice over a 6-month time period during which consensus was achieved.

Results: Twenty-one experts participated in the effort and proposed 120 data elements. Participation rates in the first and second round of the Delphi survey were 95.2% and 71.4%, respectively. The working group reached final consensus among responders on 90 data elements capturing relevant general medical and surgical history, procedure and discharge, short-term and long-term follow-up, device factors, and surgery and surgeon factors.

Conclusions: The CRN successfully developed a set of core data elements to support the study of POP technologies through convening an expert panel on POP technologies and using the Delphi method. These standardized data elements have the potential to influence patient and provider decisions about treatments and include important outcomes related to efficacy and safety.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
The impact of adjuvant antibiotic hydrogel application on the primary stability of uncemented hip stems. Prospective randomized evaluation of the sustained impact of assistive artificial intelligence on anesthetists' ultrasound scanning for regional anesthesia. Clinical effectiveness of a modified muscle sparing posterior technique compared with a standard lateral approach in hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures (HemiSPAIRE): a multicenter, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. IDEAL evaluation for global surgery innovation. No frugal innovation without frugal evaluation: the Global IDEAL Sub-Framework.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1