Cited by 719Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsDelphi Technique in ResearchStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Reports: The CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 Extension

Open access
Butcher, Nancy J., Monsour, Andrea, Mew, Emma J., Chan, An-Wen, Moher, David, Mayo-Wilson, Evan, Terwee, Caroline B., Chee-A-Tow, Alyssandra +18 more·2022·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: Clinicians, patients, and policy makers rely on published results from clinical trials to help make evidence-informed decisions. To critically evaluate and use trial results, readers require complete and transparent information regarding what was planned, done, and found. Specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be reported in publications of clinical trials is needed to reduce deficient reporting practices that obscure issues with outcome selection, assessment, and analysis. Objective: To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for reporting outcomes in clinical trial reports through integration with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement. Evidence Review: Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for the reporting of outcomes in clinical trial reports. Findings: The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 128 recommendations relevant to reporting outcomes in trial reports, the majority (83%) of which were not included in the CONSORT 2010 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 64 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 30 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 17 items that elaborate on the CONSORT 2010 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the trial outcomes, including how and when they were assessed (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 6a), defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups during sample size calculations (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 7a), describing the statistical methods used to compare groups for the primary and secondary outcomes (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 12a), and describing the prespecified analyses and any outcome analyses not prespecified (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 18). Conclusions and Relevance: This CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement provides 17 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all published clinical trial reports and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2022.21022

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Items related to reporting of how harms were assessed and analysed (items 7, 15, 21a, 23a, 27), how outcomes were measured and analysed (items 14, 26), and how the intervention and comparator were actually administered and by whom (item 24) were integrated from key CONSORT extensions.

    “- Addition of items related to reporting of how harms [24] were assessed and analysed (items 7, 15, 21a, 23a, 27), how outcomes [25] were measured and analysed (items 14, 26), and how the intervention [27,28] and comparator were actually administered and by whom (item 24).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Butcher, N. J., Monsour, A., Mew, E. J., Chan, A.-W., Moher, D., Mayo-Wilson, E., Terwee, C. B., Chee-A-Tow, A., Baba, A., Gavin, F., Grimshaw, J. M., Kelly, L. E., Saeed, L., Thabane, L., Askie, L., Smith, M., Farid-Kapadia, M., Williamson, P. R., Szatmari, P., Tugwell, P., Golub, R. M., Monga, S., Vohra, S., Marlin, S., Ungar, W. J., & Offringa, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Hospital for Sick Children (CA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • public panel member, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • patient panel member, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
  • Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
  • Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Queen's University (CA)
Corresponding author
Butcher, Nancy J.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2022-12-13
Volume
328
Issue
22
Pages
2252
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W4311249208
Cited by
719
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 147 · 2025: 254 · 2024: 236 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 1
FWCI
46.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Medical Research Council (MR/S014357/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
CONSORT 2010, outcome reporting, clinical trial reporting, reporting guidelines, outcome selection, outcome measurement, outcome analysis, EQUATOR Network, Delphi consensus, clinical trial transparency, primary and secondary outcomes, sample size justification
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Research Design, Guidelines as Topic, Checklist

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review