8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The opioid use disorder core outcomes set (OUD–COS) for treatment research: findings from a Delphi consensus study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background and Aim

          There is no gold‐standard and considerable heterogeneity in outcome measures used to evaluate treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) along the opioid treatment cascade. The aim of this study was to develop the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) opioid use disorder core outcomes set (OUD–COS).

          Design

          Four‐round, e‐Delphi expert panel consensus study and plenary research group discussion and targeted consultation.

          Setting

          United States.

          Participants

          A panel of 25 members including clinical practitioners, clinical researchers and administrative staff from the CTN, the network's affiliated clinical and community sites and the NIDA Centre for the CTN.

          Measurements

          From a pool of 24 candidate items in four domains (biomedical/disease status; behaviors, symptoms and functioning; opioid treatment cascade; and morbidity and mortality), the panel completed an on‐line questionnaire to rank items with defined specification on a 9‐point scale for importance, with a standard 70% consensus criterion.

          Findings

          After the fourth round of the questionnaire and subsequent discussion, consensus was reached for five outcomes: two patient‐reported (global impression of improvement and incident non‐fatal overdose); one clinician‐reported (illicit/non‐medical drug toxicology); and two from administrative records (duration of treatment and fatal opioid poisoning).

          Conclusions

          An e‐Delphi consensus study has produced the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network opioid use disorder core outcomes set (version 1) for opioid use disorder treatment efficacy and effectiveness research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials.

          The protocol of a clinical trial serves as the foundation for study planning, conduct, reporting, and appraisal. However, trial protocols and existing protocol guidelines vary greatly in content and quality. This article describes the systematic development and scope of SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013, a guideline for the minimum content of a clinical trial protocol.The 33-item SPIRIT checklist applies to protocols for all clinical trials and focuses on content rather than format. The checklist recommends a full description of what is planned; it does not prescribe how to design or conduct a trial. By providing guidance for key content, the SPIRIT recommendations aim to facilitate the drafting of high-quality protocols. Adherence to SPIRIT would also enhance the transparency and completeness of trial protocols for the benefit of investigators, trial participants, patients, sponsors, funders, research ethics committees or institutional review boards, peer reviewers, journals, trial registries, policymakers, regulators, and other key stakeholders.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials

            High quality protocols facilitate proper conduct, reporting, and external review of clinical trials. However, the completeness of trial protocols is often inadequate. To help improve the content and quality of protocols, an international group of stakeholders developed the SPIRIT 2013 Statement (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials). The SPIRIT Statement provides guidance in the form of a checklist of recommended items to include in a clinical trial protocol. This SPIRIT 2013 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides important information to promote full understanding of the checklist recommendations. For each checklist item, we provide a rationale and detailed description; a model example from an actual protocol; and relevant references supporting its importance. We strongly recommend that this explanatory paper be used in conjunction with the SPIRIT Statement. A website of resources is also available (www.spirit-statement.org). The SPIRIT 2013 Explanation and Elaboration paper, together with the Statement, should help with the drafting of trial protocols. Complete documentation of key trial elements can facilitate transparency and protocol review for the benefit of all stakeholders.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies.

              To investigate how consensus is operationalized in Delphi studies and to explore the role of consensus in determining the results of these studies. Systematic review of a random sample of 100 English language Delphi studies, from two large multidisciplinary databases [ISI Web of Science (Thompson Reuters, New York, NY) and Scopus (Elsevier, Amsterdam, NL)], published between 2000 and 2009. About 98 of the Delphi studies purported to assess consensus, although a definition for consensus was only provided in 72 of the studies (64 a priori). The most common definition for consensus was percent agreement (25 studies), with 75% being the median threshold to define consensus. Although the authors concluded in 86 of the studies that consensus was achieved, consensus was only specified a priori (with a threshold value) in 42 of these studies. Achievement of consensus was related to the decision to stop the Delphi study in only 23 studies, with 70 studies terminating after a specified number of rounds. Although consensus generally is felt to be of primary importance to the Delphi process, definitions of consensus vary widely and are poorly reported. Improved criteria for reporting of methods of Delphi studies are required. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                nkarnik@uic.edu
                Journal
                Addiction
                Addiction
                10.1111/(ISSN)1360-0443
                ADD
                Addiction (Abingdon, England)
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0965-2140
                1360-0443
                25 April 2022
                September 2022
                : 117
                : 9 ( doiID: 10.1111/add.v117.9 )
                : 2438-2447
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Institute for Juvenile Research, Department of Psychiatry University of Illinois Chicago Chicago IL USA
                [ 2 ] Addictions Department, School of Academic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London London UK
                [ 3 ] Division of Research Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute Seattle WA USA
                [ 4 ] Kaiser Permanente Northern California Oakland CA USA
                [ 5 ] Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences University of California Los Angeles CA USA
                [ 6 ] Yale School of Medicine, Internal Medicine Program in Addiction Medicine New Haven CT USA
                [ 7 ] National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for Clinical Trials Network Bethesda MD USA
                [ 8 ] Emmes Company, LLC National Institute on Drug Abuse Data and Statistics Center and Clinical Coordinating Center Rockville MD USA
                [ 9 ] Division of Alcohol, Drugs and Addiction, McLean Hospital and Department of Psychiatry Harvard Medical School, McLean Hospital Belmont MA USA
                [ 10 ] Department of Community and Behavioral Health Washington State University Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine Spokane WA USA
                [ 11 ] Department of Population Health Sciences Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY USA
                [ 12 ] Friends Research Institute Baltimore MD USA
                [ 13 ] Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and Department of Psychiatry New York State Psychiatric Institute New York NY USA
                [ 14 ] Departments of Family Medicine, Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education University of Washington Seattle WA USA
                [ 15 ] RAND Corporation Santa Monica CA USA
                [ 16 ] Duke University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Duke University Medical Center Durham NC USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Niranjan S. Karnik MD, PhD, Institute for Juvenile Research, 1747 West Roosevelt Road, Chicago, IL 60608, USA.

                Email: nkarnik@ 123456uic.edu

                [ † ]

                Joint first authors.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7650-3008
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1307-2498
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4006-010X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5809-739X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2551-4772
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3122-634X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9104-0670
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5909-2259
                Article
                ADD15875
                10.1111/add.15875
                9543602
                35293064
                a7857bcc-54f5-4221-a65a-c44118a40779
                © 2022 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                : 19 October 2021
                : 23 February 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 3, Pages: 10, Words: 6727
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institute on Drug Abuse , doi 10.13039/100000026;
                Categories
                Research Report
                Research Reports
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                September 2022
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.2.0 mode:remove_FC converted:07.10.2022

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                core outcomes set,delphi consensus,efficacy and effectiveness research,opioid treatment cascade,opioid use disorder,us national institute on drug abuse

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content180

                Cited by6

                Most referenced authors586