Mechanical ventilation core outcome set uptake in Cochrane systematic reviews. A cross-sectional study

Session Type
Oral presentation
Core outcomes
Garegnani L1, Oltra G1, Burgos M1, Ivaldi D1, Escobar Liquitay C1
1Instituto Universitario del Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires Cochrane Associate Centre, Argentina

Background: Core Outcome Sets (COS) are defined as an agreed standardized set of outcomes that should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all clinical trials in specific areas of health or health care. They help in reducing waste in research by improving the consistency of outcomes measured in trials and other research on the same health condition, ensuring that all important outcomes are measured. Systematic reviews of interventions summarise all the available evidence on a given topic and are used to inform healthcare decision-making. Frequently, the choice of outcomes for a systematic review raises concerns due to clinical trialists and systematic reviewers being interested in different types of outcomes. Cochrane reviews are well known for their rigorous methods and high-quality standards, with the relevance of COS in defining review questions and planning the review, acknowledged in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. In 2019, a COS was published for trials testing any intervention intended to modify mechanical ventilation (MV) duration in critical care. This specific COS uptake in Cochrane systematic reviews has not been assessed.
Objectives: To assess the uptake of the MV COS in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions.
Methods: Cross-sectional study. We included completed Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols of Cochrane systematic reviews of any intervention related to mechanically ventilated patients through a search in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. We extracted key information on participants, interventions, comparators, and MV COS outcomes. We also extracted data related to outcomes not included in the MV COS. For reviews or protocols published after 2019, we analysed the citation of the MV COS.
Results: We assessed 310 Cochrane reviews and protocols for eligibility. We will show the complete results at the London Colloquium.
Conclusions: We will show the conclusions at the London Colloquium.
Patient, public and/or healthcare consumer involvement: Not applicable