Protocol for the development of Pituitary Surgery Core Outcomes and Priorities (PitCOP)
Newall, N.; Valetopoulou, A.; Khan, D. Z.; Borg, A.; Bremner, F.; Dorward, N.; Fleseriu, M.; Ginn, J.; Gurnell, M.; Korbonits, M.; Serrano, I.; Baldeweg, S. E.; Kolias, A. G.; Marcus, H. J.
Show abstract
ObjectivesWe aim to (i) identify the most important research priorities in pituitary surgery through a priority setting partnership (PSP) and (ii) develop a core outcome set (COS) for pituitary surgery research. DesignInternational modified Delphi consensus processes. SubjectsParticipants are key stakeholders in pituitary surgery, including: healthcare professionals (HCPs) (nurse specialists, neurosurgeons, endocrinologists, ophthalmologists, otolaryngologists, radiologists, pathologists, and oncologists); service users (patients, family members and carers); and charity representatives. MethodsIn PSP round one, participants are asked what questions relating to diagnosis, treatment, long-term care and follow-up they would like answered by future research. Responses will be grouped thematically, and a systematic literature review will identify which research priorities remain unanswered. In round two, participants will rank their top 10 unanswered research priorities. In COS round one, participants are presented with an initial list of outcomes identified from relevant literature,1,2 and asked to (i) rate outcomes based on perceived importance for inclusion in a core outcome set, and (ii) suggest additional outcomes. In round two, participants will re-score each outcome, while considering the summarised group scores from round one. The final round of PSP and COS will be held as a live consensus workshop (with equal representation of stakeholder groups) to determine the top 10 research priorities and the final core outcome set. ResultsThe study is currently underway, and aims to be complete by August 2024. ConclusionsThe PitCOP study will establish patient-centred research priorities and a core outcome set for pituitary surgery research. This will help to improve the relevance, efficiency, and quality of future pituitary surgery research.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Metabolic disorders and the risk of head and neck cancer: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis 88%
- Protocol of the observational study STRATUM-OS: First step in the development and validation of the STRATUM tool based on multimodal data processing to assist surgery in patients affected by intra-axial brain tumours 88%
- Management and outcomes of myelomeningocele-associated hydrocephalus in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Alpha thalassemia/mental retardation X-linked (ATRX) protein expression in human pituitary neuroendocrine tumours and its reported correlation to prognosis and clinical outcomes: A systematic review 93%
- Short-term outcomes of pubertal suppression in a selected cohort of 12 to 15 year old young people with persistent gender dysphoria in the UK 89%
- Menopause education of healthcare professionals: A scoping review protocol 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Association of Extent of Resection and Functional Outcomes in Diffuse Low-Grade Glioma: Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis 88%
- Predictors of postoperative biochemical remission in acromegaly 85%
- Disrupting Akt-Wnt/β-catenin signaling suppresses glioblastoma stem cell growth and tumor progression in immunocompetent mice 82%
Similar papers in this journal
- Physiological and Psychological Effects of Parental Traditional Thai Massage on Children with Autism: A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial 86%
- Pilot Feasibility Clinical Trial of Virtual Reality for Pain Management During Repeated Pediatric Laser Procedures: Study Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial 86%
- Prospective validation of a predictive non-invasive SNP-based biomarker signature in resectable pancreatic cancer: a study protocol 85%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.