The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: There is increasing recognition that insufficient attention has been paid to the choice of outcomes measured in clinical trials. The lack of a standardized outcome classification system results in inconsistencies due to ambiguity and variation in how outcomes are described across different studies. Being able to classify by outcome would increase efficiency in searching sources such as clinical trial registries, patient registries, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database of core outcome sets (COS), thus aiding knowledge discovery. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A literature review was carried out to determine existing outcome classification systems, none of which were sufficiently comprehensive or granular for classification of all potential outcomes from clinical trials. A new taxonomy for outcome classification was developed, and as proof of principle, outcomes extracted from all published COS in the COMET database, selected Cochrane reviews, and clinical trial registry entries were classified using this new system. RESULTS: Application of this new taxonomy to COS in the COMET database revealed that 274/299 (92%) COS include at least one physiological outcome, whereas only 177 (59%) include at least one measure of impact (global quality of life or some measure of functioning) and only 105 (35%) made reference to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This outcome taxonomy will be used to annotate outcomes included in COS within the COMET database and is currently being piloted for use in Cochrane Reviews within the Cochrane Linked Data Project. Wider implementation of this standard taxonomy in trial and systematic review databases and registries will further promote efficient searching, reporting, and classification of trial outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative supports standardisation, providing a taxonomy 19 to classify outcomes used in trials.”
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A strength of this review is the meticulous process of categorising and coding all measures with reference to literature, including the novel application of the COMET taxonomy to Acceptance and Commitment Therapy research. 19”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Wilson, I. B. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520250075037 · Cited by 3,027
The COMET Handbook: version 1.0
Williamson, P. R., Altman, D. G., Bagley, H., Barnes, K. L., Blazeby, J. M., Brookes, S. T., Clarke, M., Gargon, E., Gorst, S., Harman, N., et al. (2017) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1978-4 · Cited by 2,011
Self-citationThe human phenotype ontology: a tool for annotating and analyzing human hereditary disease
Robinson, P. N., Köhler, S., Bauer, S., Seelow, D., Horn, D., & Mundlos, S. (2008) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.09.017 · Cited by 1,034
Developing core outcome measurement sets for clinical trials: OMERACT filter 2.0
Boers, M., Kirwan, J. R., Wells, G., Beaton, D., Gossec, L., d'Agostino, M.-A., Conaghan, P. G., Bingham, C. O., Brooks, P., Landewé, R., et al. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.013 · Cited by 781
Davey, J., Turner, R. M., Clarke, M. J., & Higgins, J. P. (2011) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-160 · Cited by 404
Self-citationWhat are the best outcome measurements for atopic eczema? A systematic review
Schmitt, J., Langan, S., & Williams, H. C. (2007) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2007.08.011 · Cited by 388
Choosing Important Health Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research: A Systematic Review
Gargon, E., Gurung, B., Medley, N., Altman, D. G., Blazeby, J. M., Clarke, M. J., & Williamson, P. R. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099111 · Cited by 343
Self-citationBoers, M., Tugwell, P., Felson, D. T., Pl, V. R., Kirwan, J., Edmonds, J. P., Js, S., Khaltaev, N., & Kd, M. (1994) · PubMed · Cited by 308
Macefield, R. C., Jacobs, M., Korfage, I. J., Nicklin, J., Whistance, R. N., Brookes, S. T., Sprangers, M. A. G., & Blazeby, J. M. (2014) · Trials · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-49 · Cited by 181
Gorst, S. L., Gargon, E., Clarke, M. J., Blazeby, J. M., Altman, D. G., & Williamson, P. R. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146444 · Cited by 154
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 630
Clearfield, E., Miller, V., Nadglowski, J. F., Barradas, K., Naber, J. A., Sanyal, A. J., Neuschwander‐Tetri, B. A., Messner, D. A., Baldyga, W., Balp, M., et al. (2021) · Hepatology Communications · doi:10.1002/hep4.1678 · Cited by 7
MacLennan, S., Wintner, L. M., Beyer, K., Lawlor, A., Tripathee, S., Dabestani, S., Marconi, L. S., Giles, R. H., Woodward, R., Hemelrijck, M. V., et al. (2023) · BJUI Compass · doi:10.1002/bco2.266 · Cited by 5
“After assessing heterogeneity, we will code conceptually similar outcomes, regardless of the exact definition, to common outcome names and further organise the outcomes under domains using the Williamson/Clarke Taxonomy.(25)”
Lee, N., Smith, C. E., Bailey, R. L., Ariyoshi, K., Smith, S. C., Black, N. A., & Edwards, T. (2025) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-024-08713-6 · Cited by 6
“The identified groupings will be mapped to the outcome taxonomy framework proposed by the COMET Initiative [8, 16].”
Gorst, S. L., Lucas, J. P., Dodd, S. R., Lucas, S. W., Baldwin, F. D., & Williamson, P. R. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111889 · Cited by 5
Self-citationVallinga, M. S., Roijer, P. J., Pidgeon, T. E., Angelini, M., Ceulemans, A., Bakker, A., Carrière, B., Rashid, T. G., Bellringer, J., Belinky, J., et al. (2025) · EClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103323 · Cited by 5
“20 Similar outcomes were deduplicated.”
Rodrigues, M., Syed, Z., Dufort, A., Sanger, N., Ghiassi, P., Sanger, S., Panesar, B., D’Elia, A., Parpia, S., Samaan, Z., et al. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.03.002 · Cited by 5
Hamzeh, H., Kelly, C. A., Lee, A. L., Spinou, A., Marques, A. S. P. D. D., Herrero‐Cortina, B., Burtin, C., Hall, K., & Spencer, S. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34101 · Cited by 6
Cinotti, R., Derouin, Y., Chenet, A., Oujamaa, L., Glize, B., Launey, Y., Dahyot‐Fizelier, C., Cartron, E., Renvoisé, M., Sautenet, B., et al. (2024) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/54525 · Cited by 5
“This survey will gather opinions and organize the outcomes into a prioritized list.”
Harris, E., Fenton, S., Stephenson, J. R., Ewart, F., Goharinezhad, S., Lee, H., & Astin, F. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1111/jocn.17578 · Cited by 5
“Our narrative synthesis aimed to identify the potential benefits of VR interventions on other patient outcomes linked to domains in the COMET typology (Dodd et al. 2018).”
Delameillieure, A., Somogyi, V., Schenk, S., Töreyin, Z. N., Stenzel, N., Bulck, L. V., Breuls, S., Kreuter, M., Wuyts, W. A., Moğulkoç, N., et al. (2025) · European Respiratory Review · doi:10.1183/16000617.0133-2024 · Cited by 5
“Step 1: We used the COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) taxonomy to categorise the long list of outcomes retrieved verbatim [30].”
The development of a faecal incontinence core outcome set: an international Delphi study protocol
Assmann, S. L., Keszthelyi, D., Kleijnen, J., Kimman, M., Anastasiou, F., Bradshaw, E., Carrington, E. V., Chiarioni, G., Maeda, Y., Muris, J. W. M., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Colorectal Disease · doi:10.1007/s00384-021-03865-2 · Cited by 5
Russell, G., Rana, N., Watts, R., Roshny, S., Siddiqi, N., & Rose, L. (2022) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afac267 · Cited by 5
Harman, N., Gorst, S. L., Williamson, P. R., Barnathan, E. S., Baughman, R. P., Judson, M. A., Junk, H., Kampstra, N. A., Sullivan, E. J., Victorson, D. E., et al. (2022) · Sarcoidosis vasculitis and diffuse lung diseases · doi:10.36141/svdld.v39i3.12319 · Cited by 5
Self-citationA Foundation for Patient-Centered Core Impact Sets: Key Learnings from Past and Existing Approaches
Perfetto, E. M., Love, T. R., Oehrlein, E. M., Schoch, S. C., Schrandt, S., Black, H. L., Bright, J. L., Brooke, N. J., Burke, L. B., Coetzee, T., et al. (2023) · Patient · doi:10.1007/s40271-023-00630-1 · Cited by 5
“For example, “economic” outcomes are a single category in an existing taxonomy [37].”
Self-citationEngler, K., Avallone, F., Cadri, A., & Lebouché, B. (2024) · HIV Medicine · doi:10.1111/hiv.13599 · Cited by 8
“While initially we intended to classify identified PROs and PROMs with the COMET taxonomy of outcomes for core outcome sets [38], the outcome domains were often either too medical or insufficiently granular to meaningfully categorize our findings.”
Assmann, S. L., Mulders, E. H. C., Kimman, M., Keszthelyi, D., & Breukink, S. O. (2024) · Colorectal Disease · doi:10.1111/codi.17075 · Cited by 5
“The outcomes were systematically categorized into domains and core areas of the COMET taxonomy, which comprises 38 domains, distributed across five core areas: ‘Death’, ‘physiological/clinical’, ‘life impact’, ‘resource use’, and ‘adverse events’ [ 14 ].”
InfluentialInterventions Addressing Symptoms in Older Adults with Multimorbidity: An Umbrella Review
Cheng, C., & Christensen, M. (2024) · Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s452426 · Cited by 5
Valsecchi, A. A., Giovanardi, F., Malandrini, F. B., Meregaglia, M., Servetto, A., Bennati, C., Pinto, C., Maïo, M. D., & Ciani, O. (2024) · The Breast · doi:10.1016/j.breast.2024.103817 · Cited by 5
“Finally, the questionnaire items were extracted and assigned to a specific domain according to a predefined taxonomy of 38 outcome classification items, which is used for the outcomes included in all studies, core outcome sets (COS), systematic reviews and trial registries [28].”
Howie, A. H., Tingley, K., Inbar‐Feigenberg, M., Mitchell, J. J., Angel, K., Gentle, J., Smith, M. P., Offringa, M., Butcher, N. J., Campeau, P. M., et al. (2024) · Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · doi:10.1186/s13023-024-03364-x · Cited by 5
“…search strategy, duplicate screening and data extraction, and multi-disciplinary engagement in decision-making about the grouping and synthesis of outcomes, guided by published frameworks [35, 37] and incorporating the views of clinician experts, patients, and caregivers on our Steering Committee.”
Core Outcome Domains for Elbow Replacement (CODER)
Watts, A. C., McDaid, C., & Hewitt, C. (2024) · The Bone & Joint Journal · doi:10.1302/0301-620x.106b11.bjj-2024-0352.r1 · Cited by 5
Jacobsen, P. C., Berry, K., Clarkson, L., Hiscocks, R., Hopkins, I., Morgan, C., Tandon, D., Teale, A., Tyler, N., & Wood, L. (2024) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-024-06294-x · Cited by 5
“We then mapped each outcome to an established taxonomy of outcomes across different health areas [30].”
Correcting crowdsourced annotations to improve detection of outcome types in evidence based medicine
Abaho, M., Bollegala, D., Williamson, P. R., & Dodd, S. R. (2019) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · Cited by 5
Self-citationThe asthma evidence base: a call for core outcomes in interventional trials
Tejwani, V., Chang, H.-Y., Tran, A. P., Moloney, R., & Khatri, S. B. (2020) · Journal of Asthma · doi:10.1080/02770903.2020.1744641 · Cited by 5
“Using the COMET taxonomy outcome classification (16), 53”
Igarashi, M., Yamaguchi, S., Kawaguchi, T., Ogawa, M., Sato, S., & Fujii, C. (2021) · Neuropsychopharmacology Reports · doi:10.1002/npr2.12216 · Cited by 5
Archer, J. E., Baird, C., Gardner, A. C., Rushton, A. B., & Heneghan, N. R. (2021) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01811-5 · Cited by 5
“We have defined PROM according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy [27].”
Sheng, X., Chen, C., Ji, Z., Hu, H., Zhang, M., Wang, H., Pang, B., Zhai, J., Zhang, D., Zhang, J., et al. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062497 · Cited by 6
Hassan, L., Cortenraad, S. A. M., Rosenberg, C. B. M., Kimman, M., Haanen, M., van Gemert, W. G., & Visschers, R. G. J. (2023) · BMJ Paediatrics Open · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001691 · Cited by 5
Metryka, A., Brown, N., Mercer, J., Wilkinson, S., Jones, S. A., Williamson, P. R., & Bruce, I. A. (2019) · LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · doi:10.1177/2326409818816721 · Cited by 5
Self-citationCollaborative, P. (2025) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers17172764 · Cited by 4
Patient reported outcomes in pediatric physical therapy: a scoping review and evidence map
Korteling, D., Limmen, S., Ketelaar, M., Daams, J. G., Luijten, M. A. J., van Oers, H. A., Bloemen, M. A. T., Haverman, L., & Engelbert, R. (2025) · Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes · doi:10.1186/s41687-025-00947-5 · Cited by 4
“Previous studies also show overlapping PROs across different health conditions because of an overall desire of well-being and optimal functioning [19, 40].”
Ali, A., Essilini, A., Daunt, A., Flood, M., McCarthy, C., Strawbridge, J., Clyne, B., & Moriarty, F. (2025) · Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2025.11.009 · Cited by 4
Javid, N., Donnolley, N. R., Kingdom, J. C., Dadouch, R., & D'Souza, R. D. (2024) · Women and Birth · doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2024.101614 · Cited by 4
Several methods for assessing research waste in reviews with a systematic search: a scoping review
Rosengaard, L. O., Andersen, M. Z., Rosenberg, J., & Fonnes, S. (2024) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.18466 · Cited by 5
Outcome reporting in studies on critically ill obstetric patients: A systematic review
Viau-Lapointe, J., Kfouri, J., Thompson, M., Ashraf, R., D'Souza, R. D., & Lapinsky, S. E. (2024) · Obstetric Medicine · doi:10.1177/1753495x241302848 · Cited by 4
Shaker, H. A., Barry, H. E., & Hughes, C. M. (2025) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afaf102 · Cited by 4
“Accordingly, the final COS comprised six outcomes from three core areas: resource use, adverse events and life impact, with the latter two core areas proven to be less frequently reported in earlier COS studies [22].”
InfluentialImproving care pathways through evidence-based modeling strategies: a scoping review
de Vigneulles, B. D. S., Lan, R., Mick, G., Dussart, C., & Carrouel, F. (2025) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2025.105751 · Cited by 4
Baird, C., Archer, J. E., Gardner, A. C., Rushton, A. B., & Heneghan, N. R. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048956 · Cited by 4
“As yet there is no standardised HR-QoL measure (forming part of a ‘core outcome set’ as per the COMET initiative) 19 for the EOS population.”
Outcomes reported in trials of treatments for severe malaria: The need for a core outcome set
Lampro, L., & George, E. C. (2022) · Tropical Medicine & International Health · doi:10.1111/tmi.13803 · Cited by 4
“The outcome measures were then grouped and categorised into the domains of the outcome taxonomy [15] recommended by the ‘Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials’ (COMET) initiative [14].”
InfluentialYousuf, S., Rzewuska, M., Duncan, E., & Ramsay, C. R. (2022) · JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance · doi:10.1093/jacamr/dlac127 · Cited by 4
A Core Outcome Set for Interventions to Prevent and/or Treat Delirium in Palliative Care
Bryans, A., Siddiqi, N., Burry, L. D., Clarke, M. J., Koffman, J., Agar, M. R., & Rose, L. (2023) · Journal of Pain and Symptom Management · doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.05.013 · Cited by 4
Self-citationRASHED, R., Kowalski, K. L., Walton, D. M., Niazigharemakhe, A., & Rushton, A. B. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0295761 · Cited by 5
Patient-reported outcomes in research on critically ill obstetric patients
Viau-Lapointe, J., Juandó‐Prats, C., Zapata, R., Kfouri, J., Ortuno-Nacho, J., Ashraf, R., D'Souza, R. D., Rojas-Suárez, J. A., & Lapinsky, S. E. (2024) · Obstetric Medicine · doi:10.1177/1753495x241290681 · Cited by 4
Tobey, T., Ortega‐Loayza, A. G., Choe, S., Haddadin, O. M., Bardazzi, F., Croitoru, D. O., Chen, D. M., Vague, M., Dini, V., Hampton, P. J., et al. (2025) · Archives of Dermatological Research · doi:10.1007/s00403-025-03920-w · Cited by 5
“The methodology for this study adheres to established guidelines for conducting e-Delphi surveys, including CS-COUSIN [10], and draws upon successful frameworks such as HISTORIC [10] and HOME [21, 22].”
Hansel, J., Fuchs, A., Radcliffe, G., Sotiriou, A., Rivett, K., Bohnenblust, V., Grimes, R., Fally, M., Greif, R. T., Cook, T. M., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-096886 · Cited by 4
Engineering Infection Controls to Reduce Indoor Transmission of Respiratory Infections
Baduashvili, A., Radonovich, L. J., Leslie, L., Pease, S., Brickson, C., Chockalingam, L., Banacos, N., Fitzgerald, B., Wagner, J., Bahnfleth, W. P., et al. (2025) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/annals-25-00577 · Cited by 4
Razanskaite, V., Kallis, C., Young, B., Williamson, P. R., & Bodger, K. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056413 · Cited by 4
Self-citationO’Rinn, S., Barrett, J. F. R., Parsons, J. A., Kingdom, J. C., & D'Souza, R. D. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060699 · Cited by 4
Hamzeh, H., Kelly, C. A., & Spencer, S. (2023) · Physiotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.physio.2023.07.001 · Cited by 4
González-Jaramillo, V., Luethi, N., Egloff, M., Roa‐Díaz, Z. M., González-Jaramillo, N., Díaz-Ríos, C., Christen, A., Dodd, S. R., Eychmüller, S., & Zambrano, S. C. (2024) · Annals of Palliative Medicine · doi:10.21037/apm-23-435 · Cited by 3
Self-citationChangsiripun, C., Chirakalwasan, N., Dias, S., & McDaid, C. (2024) · Sleep Medicine Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101963 · Cited by 4
A tool for assessing the comprehensiveness of outcome reporting within clinical trials in pregnancy
Lim, J. W.-J., Lor, K. Y., & D'Souza, R. D. (2020) · Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/aogs.14072 · Cited by 4
“1,17 These outcomes are grouped under five core areas – (1) mortality/survival; (2) systemspecific morbidity (physiological/clinical); (3) functioning or life-impact; (4) resource-use; and (5) adverse events/effects.”
Vanhala, A., Lehto, A.-R., Maksimow, A. T., Torkki, P. M., & Kivivuori, S. (2022) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08132-w · Cited by 4
“The COMET taxonomy, created by Dodd and others [27], is an outcome framework intended for developing and assessing COS in clinical trials and is based on previous conceptual and empirical work [28].”
InfluentialFransen, F., Spuls, P. I., Alam, M., Badawi, A., Boixeda, P., Hædersdal, M., Hamzavi, I. H., Hedelund, L., Kelly, K. M., Kono, T., et al. (2020) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038145 · Cited by 4
Veskimäe, E., Subbarayan, S., Campi, R., Carron, D., Omar, M. I., Yuan, C., Dimitropoulos, K., Hemelrijck, M. V., Bryan, R. T., N'Dow, J. M., et al. (2021) · Bladder Cancer · doi:10.3233/blc-201510 · Cited by 4
“Coded outcomes were further grouped in broader domains using the standardised Williamson and Clarke Taxonomy (W/C Taxonomy) [28].”
Carroll, J. H., Cross, J. H., Hickson, M., Williams, E., Aldridge, V., & Collinson, A. (2022) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06629-7 · Cited by 3
“Overview and method The combined list of potential outcomes derived from the systematic review in phase 1 and semi-structured interviews with parents in phase 2 will be grouped into outcome domains according to an outcome taxonomy (Table 1) [28].”
Alkhaffaf, B. H., Blazeby, J. M., Metryka, A., Glenny, A., Adeyeye, A. A., Costa, P., del Val, I. D., Gisbertz, S. S., Güner, A., Law, S. Y.-K., et al. (2021) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-16047/v2 · Cited by 4
Self-citationSpooner, C., Vivat, B., White, N., & Stone, P. (2023) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/49774 · Cited by 3
“JMIR Res Protoc 2023 | vol. 12 | e49774 | p. 4https://www.researchprotocols.org/2023/1/e49774 (page number not for citation purposes) XSL•FO RenderX The COMET taxonomy was used as an external framework to support the development of analytical themes and facilitate the combination of the results of both the quantitativ…”
InfluentialDucey, J., Lansdale, N., Gorst, S. L., Bray, L., Teunissen, N. M., Cullis, P. S., Faulkner, J., Gray, V., Gammino, L. G., Slater, G., et al. (2024) · BMJ Paediatrics Open · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2023-002262 · Cited by 3
Outcomes in early mobilisation research in critically ill children: A scoping review
Geven, B. M., Ista, E., van Woensel, J. B. M., Verbruggen, S. C. A. T., van Etten‐Jamaludin, F. S., & Maaskant, J. M. (2024) · Australian Critical Care · doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101139 · Cited by 3
Embedding a Choice Experiment in an Online Decision Aid or Tool: Scoping Review
Wickramasekera, N., Shackley, P., & Rowen, D. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/59209 · Cited by 3
“The Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy [22] was used to systematically classify attributes into core areas and domains.”
Britton, E., Kobetić, M. D., McNally, E. H., Rudd, S., Potter, S., Hinchliffe, R. J., & Rees, J. R. E. (2025) · HPB · doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2025.02.008 · Cited by 3
Exercise interventions for older patients with frailty and heart failure: A scoping review
Liu, S., Zhang, M., Xiong, X.-Y., Chen, L., & Wu, R. (2025) · Geriatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2025.03.050 · Cited by 3
Moghaddam, Z. N., Reinhardt, E. K., Thurm, A. E., Potter, B. K., Smith, M., Graham, C., Tiller, B. H., Baker, S. A., Bilder, D. A., Bogar, R., et al. (2025) · Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · doi:10.1186/s13023-025-03900-3 · Cited by 5
“Ahead of the consensus workshop, the 20 candidate outcomes were categorized into four core areas to highlight the comprehensive nature of our remaining candidate outcomes: “Life Impact”, “Growth and Development”, “Physiological/Clinical”, and “Death” (Table 2) [67, 73, 74].”
Frameworks of Health Outcomes for Performance Specifications in Laboratory Medicine
Bossuyt, P. M., Loh, T. P., Bell, K. J., Lord, S., & Horvath, A. R. (2026) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/hvag014 · Cited by 3
Andersen, C., Presseau, J., Saigle, V., Fitzgerald, E., Lamanna, M., Talbot, P., Delaney, A. P., & English, S. W. (2022) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.1068499 · Cited by 3
“Clinical trials define an “outcome” as a measurement or observation used to assess the effect of an intervention or process of care with respect to side effects (risks) and effectiveness (benefits) (1).”
Russell, G., Rana, N., Reilly, S., Shehadeh, A., Page, V. J., Siddiqi, N., & Rose, L. (2024) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afae227 · Cited by 3
“We then reviewed outcome wording for clarity and grouped them into domains using the COMET taxonomy [29].”
Development of a core outcome set for neonatal septic shock management: a study protocol
Li, Y., Shi, J. C., Li, X., Li, Y., Guo, X., Lu, M., Wan, X., Tang, J., Luo, B., Fu, M. R., et al. (2024) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-024-08422-0 · Cited by 3
Roijer, P. J., Vallinga, M. S., Jorna, M. M. F., Pidgeon, T. E., Ket, J. C. F., Bouman, M., & Mullender, M. G. (2024) · International Journal of Transgender Health · doi:10.1080/26895269.2024.2429490 · Cited by 3
“The taxonomy developed by Dodd et al. (2018) (Dodd et al., 2018) for the classification of outcomes included in trials is widely used in the development of COSs and endorsed by COMET (COMET Initiative, 2018).”
Li, X., Zhang, Y., Mao, Z., Chen, Q., Xiaoxue, L., Chen, H., Sun, Y., Yu, C., & Wang, X. (2025) · Patient Preference and Adherence · doi:10.2147/ppa.s501409 · Cited by 2
Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review (part I)
Schulz, D., Gaeth, C., Jordan, M. C., Herath, S. C., Spering, C., Bieler, D., Windolf, J., & Neubert, A. (2025) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-025-02824-0 · Cited by 4
“Afterwards, unique outcomes were categorized using the taxonomy of the COMET initiative [22].”
InfluentialZwetsloot, S. L. M., van Knippenberg, S. E. M., Ayyalasomayajula, V. S. R. K., Yeung, K. K., & Jongkind, V. (2025) · European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2025.06.036 · Cited by 4
van Silfhout, N. Y., van Muilekom, M. M., van Karnebeek, C., Daams, J. G., Haverman, L., & van Eeghen, A. M. (2025) · Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders · doi:10.1186/s11689-025-09633-5 · Cited by 3
“This also accords with earlier studies, which showed that PROs often overlap across different conditions, such as cancer, congenital heart disease, and inflammatory bowel disease [35, 36].”
Heden, S. V., Chan, Y. M., Baoubbou, Z., Bruyère, O., Reginster, J., Surquin, M., Sánchez‐Rodríguez, D., & Beaudart, C. (2025) · European Geriatric Medicine · doi:10.1007/s41999-025-01285-x · Cited by 5
“Each outcome was systematically documented with the following details: the description of the outcome, how it was reported in the clinical trial, its classification based on the 38-outcome list from Dodd et al. (2018) [26], and the measurement tool used.”
McNally, E. H., Rudd, S., Mezes, P., Black, S. A., Hinchliffe, R. J., & Ozdemir, B. A. (2022) · Journal of Vascular Surgery Venous and Lymphatic Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jvsv.2022.09.014 · Cited by 3
Hörold, M., Heytens, H., Debbeler, C. M., Ehrentreich, S., Rauwolf, T., Schmeißer, A., Gottschalk, M., Bitzer, E. M., Braun-Dullaeus, R. C., & Apfelbacher, C. (2023) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-023-02227-z · Cited by 5
“We categorised by the core areas: death, physiological or clinical, life impact, resource use and adverse events [23].”
InfluentialA pediatric virtual care evaluation framework and its evolution using consensus methods
Dulude, C., Sutherland, S., Vanderhout, S. M., King, W. J., Zuijdwijk, C., Major, N., Audcent, T. A., Howley, H. E. A., Cloutier, P., Buba, M., et al. (2023) · BMC Pediatrics · doi:10.1186/s12887-023-04229-1 · Cited by 3
“…and usable framework, members also used other healthcare evaluation frameworks, including: Ontario Health Quality, [18] COMET Outcomes Classification, [30] Canada Health Infoway Benefits Evaluation Framework (CHIBEF), [31] and other work on the evaluation of telehealth usability [18, 19, 32].”
What should inpatient psychological therapies be for? Qualitative views of service users on outcomes
Morgan, C., Clarkson, L., Hiscocks, R., Hopkins, I., Berry, K., Tyler, N., Wood, L., & Jacobsen, P. C. (2023) · Health Expectations · doi:10.1111/hex.13889 · Cited by 4
“27 Also, outcomes related to the delivery of care taxonomy domain 26 mapped to the intrapersonal, inter-personal, organisational levels of the socioecological framework.”
InfluentialGhosh, M., Mukherjee, S., Santra, P., Na, G., & Basuchowdhuri, P. (2024) · Joint International Conference on Data Science & Management of Data (CODS-COMAD) · doi:10.1145/3632410.3632442 · Cited by 3
“Additionally, the benefits of automated outcome recognition can be enhanced further if it is allowed to comprehend the categorization of outcomes by a relevant classification system [10].”
The logical differentiation between small data and big data
Nyikana, W., & Iyamu, T. (2023) · South African journal of information management · doi:10.4102/sajim.v25i1.1701 · Cited by 3
“Furthermore, in health research, taxonomy is used to categorise the results of clinical trials, to improve knowledge discovery, which makes it easier for trials in the registries and databases (Dodd et al. 2018).”
Raichurkar, P., Brown, K. G. M., Ansari, N., Koh, C., Ahmadi, N., Solomon, M. J., Moran, B. J., & Steffens, D. (2024) · Gastrointestinal Disorders · doi:10.3390/gidisord6010010 · Cited by 3
The outcomes measured and reported in intracranial meningioma clinical trials: A systematic review
Millward, C. P., Keshwara, S. M., Armstrong, T. S., Barrington, H., Bell, S., Brodbelt, A. R., Bulbeck, H., Dirven, L., Grundy, P. L., Islim, A. I., et al. (2024) · Neuro-Oncology Advances · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdae030 · Cited by 3
“24,29”
Self-citationShwan, A., Lamidi, S., Chan, C., Daniels, E., Song-Smith, C., Hanna, L., Sounderajah, V., Houghton, J. S. M., & Sayers, R. D. (2024) · BJS Open · doi:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae126 · Cited by 3
“18 .”
Jia, M., Lu, Y., Liang, X., Tong, C., Wang, J., Tang, J., Yang, J., Wang, M., Jiao, W., Du, W., et al. (2022) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06801-z · Cited by 3
“Kirkham JJ, Gorst S, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, Devane D, et al. Core outcome set–STAndards for reporting: the COS-STAR statement.”
InfluentialThe key elements and application of a master protocol in the development of the core outcome set
Qiu, R., Wan, S., Guan, Z., Zhang, X., Han, S., Li, M., Hu, J., Zhao, C., Chen, Z., Liu, D., et al. (2022) · Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1111/jebm.12500 · Cited by 3
Baldwin, C. E., Phillips, A., Edney, S. M., & Lewis, L. K. (2020) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2020.10.136 · Cited by 3
Gabes, M., Knüttel, H., & Apfelbacher, C. (2021) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01701-w · Cited by 3
“[10] explored health research vocabularies and developed a pilot classification system of outcomes to prevent inconsistency and variation in how outcomes are described.”
Ashwal, E., Shehata, N., Kuo, K. H. M., Ryu, M., Ward, R. A., & Malinowski, A. K. (2022) · Blood Advances · doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2022007089 · Cited by 3
Hamzeh, H., Spencer, S., Kelly, C. A., & Pilsworth, S. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0282393 · Cited by 4
“Death, survival, and mortality are important outcomes that are usually reported in effectiveness trials [32].”
InfluentialVidyasagaran, A. L., Ayesha, R., Boehnke, J. R., Kirkham, J. J., Rose, L., Hurst, J. R., Miranda, J. J., Rana, R. Z., Vedanthan, R., Faisal, M. R., et al. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.01.29.24301589 · Cited by 3
Daniel, A. I., de Polnay, K., McCaul, M., Bendabenda, J., Prinzo, Z. W., & Naude, C. E. (2025) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017225 · Cited by 3
Šaler, F., Viđak, M., Tokalić, R., & Puljak, L. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111685 · Cited by 2
Connecting patients with clinical trials using patient navigation: a scoping review protocol
Hilal, O., Gupta, P., Luginaah, A., Moshref, L. H., Askin, N., Epp, C., Nassar, R., Hirmiz, R., Paunic, M., Hossami, M., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088828 · Cited by 2
“22 COMET is a framework that establishes standardised outcome sets, known as the ‘core outcome sets’, which define the minimum outcomes that should be measured and reported for studies evaluating the effectiveness of interventions.”
Yalçınkaya, A., Tirta, M., Rahbek, O., Jepsen, J. F., Rathleff, M. S., Iobst, C., & Kold, S. (2025) · Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research · doi:10.1186/s13018-025-06041-2 · Cited by 2
“The review employed a multi-tier classification structure drawing from COMET taxonomy with adaptations from Yalcinkaya et al. [18, 31] that consolidates all outcomes into five fundamental spheres: death, adverse events, life impact, physiological/clinical, and resource use [26, 27, 32].”
InfluentialShwan, A., Gonzalez-Aguado, M., Sayers, R. D., & Houghton, J. S. M. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0328453 · Cited by 2
“…of results will be undertaken with the full list of outcome measures identified in the reviews tabulated and presented by the taxonomy described by Dodd et al. [11] The systematic review of outcome measures used in studies of intermittent claudication has been completed and recently published.”
Li, Y. X., Hu, Y. L., Peng, H. M., Li, Y., Li, X., Su, W. Q., Li, X. W., Chen, Q., & Wan, X. L. (2025) · Journal of Nursing Management · doi:10.1155/jonm/5662163 · Cited by 2
“Furthermore, the COMET initiative has also recommended a comprehensive outcome taxonomy (a 38-category scale by Dodd et al.) that provides a standardized framework for outcome classifcation [14].”
InfluentialMurphy, L., Leckie, T., Harding, S., Gonçalves, A., & Hodgson, L. E. (2025) · BJA Open · doi:10.1016/j.bjao.2025.100501 · Cited by 4
Hiel, M. A. J., Tedbirt, B., Korte, E. W. H., Bolling, M. C., Meijer, J. M., Spuls, P. I., van der Werf, S., Yale, M., Joly, P., & Horváth, B. (2025) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1093/bjd/ljaf471 · Cited by 2
Yin, R., Soh, Z. L. H., Qin, V. M., Tasnim, S., Rohr, M., Apfelbacher, C., & Smith, H. E. (2026) · BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · doi:10.1186/s12891-025-09456-4 · Cited by 2
“The 38-category COMET outcome taxonomy [29] was used to classify the outcome measures used in the PROMs (Appendix B).”
Stallwood, E., Frey, B. N., Barrett, E. N., Markwell, A., Butcher, N. J., McCabe, R. E., & Green, S. M. (2026) · Journal of Affective Disorders Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jadr.2026.101039 · Cited by 1
Development Methodology, Availability, and Implementation of Core Outcome Sets in Pediatric Surgery
Allin, B. S. R., Bethell, G. S., & Hall, N. J. (2023) · European Journal of Pediatric Surgery · doi:10.1055/a-2196-1887 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Dodd, S., Clarke, M., Becker, L., Mavergames, C., Fish, R., & Williamson, P. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Liverpool (GB)
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- SUNY Upstate Medical University (US)
- Cochrane (GB)
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Williamson, Paula R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-04
- Volume
- 96
- Pages
- 84-92
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5854263
- OpenAlex
- W2778471389
- Cited by
- 625
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 63 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 124 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 14
- FWCI
- 69.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0513-10025)
- Medical Research Council (MR/K025635/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- clinical trial results, core outcome set, outcome standardization, knowledge discovery, clinical trial registries, adverse events, quality of life outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Quality of Life, Registries, Research Design, Databases, Factual, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Data Curation
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
