Comparison of clinical trial and systematic review outcomes for the 4 most prevalent eye diseases

JAMA Ophthalmology

Volumn 135, Issue 9, 2017, Pages 933-940

  Saldanha, Ian J ^a   Lindsley, Kristina ^a   Do, Diana V ^b   Chuck, Roy S ^c   Meyerle, Catherine ^d   Jones, Leslie S ^e   Coleman, Anne L ^f   Jampel, Henry D ^d   Dickersin, Kay ^a   Virgili, Gianni ^g  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e HOWARD UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION; ARTICLE; CATARACT; CLINICAL OUTCOME; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COCHRANE LIBRARY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); COMPARATIVE STUDY; LITERATURE; MACULAR DEGENERATION; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; VISUAL ACUITY;

CATARACT; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; MACULAR DEGENERATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PREVALENCE; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 85029553283     PISSN: 21686165     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.2583     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Meinert CL. Clinical Trials Dictionary: Terminology and Usage Recommendations. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2012.
2. National Eye Institute. Statistics and Data. https://www.nei.nih.gov/eyedata. Accessed June 30, 2017.
3. Saldanha IJ, Dickersin K, Wang X, Li T. Outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews addressing four common eye conditions: an evaluation of completeness and comparability. PLoS One. 2014;9 (10):e109400.
4. Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012;13:132.
5. Sinha I, Jones L, Smyth RL, Williamson PR. A systematic review of studies that aim to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials in children. PLoS Med. 2008;5(4):e96.
6. Gargon E, Gurung B, Medley N, et al. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e99111.
7. Juthani VV, Clearfield E, Chuck RS. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus corticosteroids for controlling inflammation after uncomplicated cataract surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 6:CD010516.
8. Krezel AK, Hogg RE, Azuara-Blanco A. Patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials on age-related macular degeneration. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(11):1560-1564.
9. Ismail R, Azuara-Blanco A, Ramsay CR. Variation of clinical outcomes used in glaucoma randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. Br J Ophthalmol. 2014;98(4):464-468.
10. Denniston AK, Holland GN, Kidess A, et al. Heterogeneity of primary outcome measures used in clinical trials of treatments for intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2015;10:97.
11. Mantelli F, Lambiase A, Bonini S, Bonini S. Clinical trials in allergic conjunctivits: a systematic review. Allergy. 2011;66(7):919-924.
12. Chiu AK, Din N, Ali N. Standardising reported outcomes of surgery for intermittent exotropia-a systematic literature review. Strabismus. 2014;22 (1):32-36.
13. Ismail R, Azuara-Blanco A, Ramsay CR. Outcome measures in glaucoma: a systematic review of cochrane reviews and protocols. J Glaucoma. 2015;24(7):533-538.
14. Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ, Califf RM, Ide NC. The ClinicalTrials.gov results database-update and key issues. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(9):852-860.
15. Li T, Vedula SS, Hadar N, Parkin C, Lau J, Dickersin K. Innovations in data collection, management, and archiving for systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(4):287-294. doi:10.7326/M14-1603
16. Ip S, Hadar N, Keefe S, et al. A Web-based archive of systematic review data. Syst Rev. 2012;1: 15. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-15
17. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org. Accessed June 30, 2017.
18. Suñer IJ, Kokame GT, Yu E, Ward J, Dolan C, Bressler NM. Responsiveness of NEI VFQ-25 to changes in visual acuity in neovascular AMD: validation studies from two phase 3 clinical trials. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50(8):3629-3635. doi:10.1167/iovs.08-3225
19. West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, Muñoz B, Bandeen-Roche K, Turano K. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE Project. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(6):774-780.
20. Mangione CM, Berry S, Spritzer K, et al. Identifying the content area for the 51-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire: results from focus groups with visually impaired persons. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998; 116(2):227-233.
21. Miskala PH, Hawkins BS, Mangione CM, et al; Submacular Surgery Trials Research Group. Responsiveness of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire to changes in visual acuity: findings in patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization-SST Report No. 1. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(4):531-539.
22. Mimouni M, Mimouni F, Segev F. Conclusiveness of the Cochrane Eye and Vision Group Reviews. BMC Res Notes. 2015;8:242.
23. Saldanha IJ, Li T, Yang C, Owczarzak J, Williamson PR, Dickersin K. Clinical trials and systematic reviews addressing similar interventions for the same condition do not consider similar outcomes to be important: a case study in HIV/AIDS. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;84:85-94.
24. Hall DA, Haider H, Szczepek AJ, et al. Systematic review of outcome domains and instruments used in clinical trials of tinnitus treatments in adults. Trials. 2016;17(1):270.
25. Whitehead L, Perkins GD, Clarey A, Haywood KL. A systematic review of the outcomes reported in cardiac arrest clinical trials: the need for a core outcome set. Resuscitation. 2015;88:150-157.
26. Blackwood B, Clarke M, McAuley DF, McGuigan PJ, Marshall JC, Rose L. How outcomes are defined in clinical trials of mechanically ventilated adults and children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;189 (8):886-893.
27. Benstoem C, Moza A, Autschbach R, Stoppe C, Goetzenich A. Evaluating outcomes used in cardiothoracic surgery interventional research: a systematic review of reviews to develop a core outcome set. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0122204. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0122204
28. Granberg S, Dahlström J, Möller C, Kähäri K, Danermark B. The ICF Core Sets for hearing loss-researcher perspective, part I: systematic review of outcome measures identified in audiological research. Int J Audiol. 2014;53(2):65-76.
29. COMET Initiative. http://www.comet-initiative.org. Accessed June 30, 2017.
30. OMERACT. https://www.omeract.org. Accessed June 30, 2017.
31. Rodrigues IA, Sprinkhuizen SM, Barthelmes D, et al. Defining a minimum set of standardized patient-centered outcome measures for macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;168:1-12.
32. International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement. Macular degeneration http://www.ichom.org/medical-conditions/macular-degeneration/. Accessed June 30, 2017.
33. International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement. Cataracts http://www.ichom.org/medical-conditions/cataracts/. Accessed June 30, 2017.
34. Mahmud I, Kelley T, Stowell C, et al. A proposed minimum standard set of outcome measures for cataract surgery. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(11): 1247-1252.
35. Ismail R, Azuara-Blanco A, Ramsay CR. Consensus on outcome measures for glaucoma effectiveness trials: results from a delphi and nominal group technique approaches. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(6):539-546.
36. Heiligenhaus A, Foeldvari I, Edelsten C, et al; Multinational Interdisciplinary Working Group for Uveitis in Childhood. Proposed outcome measures for prospective clinical trials in juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated uveitis: a consensus effort from the multinational interdisciplinary working group for uveitis in childhood. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012;64(9):1365-1372.
37. Douglas RS, Tsirbas A, Gordon M, et al; International Thyroid Eye Disease Society. Development of criteria for evaluating clinical response in thyroid eye disease using a modified Delphi technique. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(9): 1155-1160.
38. Saldanha IJ, Li T, Yang C, Ugarte-Gil C, Rutherford GW, Dickersin K. Social network analysis identified central outcomes for core outcome sets using systematic reviews of HIV/AIDS. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;70:164-175.
39. Macefield RC, Jacobs M, Korfage IJ, et al. Developing core outcomes sets: methods for identifying and including patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Trials. 2014;15:49.