Browsing by Author "Walker, Karen"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    COHESION: core outcomes in neonatal encephalopathy (protocol)
    (BMC, 2021-02-08) Quirke, Fiona A.; Healy, Patricia; Ní Bhraonáin, Elaine; Daly, Mandy; Biesty, Linda; Hurley, Tim; Walker, Karen; Meher, Shireen; Haas, David M.; Bloomfield, Frank H.; Kirkham, Jamie J.; Molloy, Eleanor J.; Devane, Declan; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Background: Neonatal encephalopathy is a complex syndrome in infants that predominantly affects the brain and other organs. The leading cause is a lack of oxygen in the blood reaching the brain. Neonatal encephalopathy can result in mortality or complications later in life, including seizures, movement disorders and cerebral palsy. Treatment options for neonatal encephalopathy are limited mainly to therapeutic hypothermia, although other potential treatments are emerging. However, evaluations of the effectiveness of treatments are challenging because of heterogeneity and inconsistency in outcomes measured and reported between trials. In this paper, we detail how we will develop a core outcome set to standardise outcomes measured and reported upon for interventions for the treatment of neonatal encephalopathy. Methods: We will systematically review the literature to identify outcomes reported previously in randomised trials and systematic reviews of randomised trials. We will identify outcomes important to parents or caregivers of infants diagnosed with and who have received treatment for neonatal encephalopathy. We will do this by conducting in person or by video teleconferencing interviews with parents or caregivers in high-income and low- to middle-income countries. Stakeholders with expertise in neonatal encephalopathy (parents/caregivers, healthcare providers and researchers) will rate the importance of identified outcomes in an online Delphi survey using either a three-round Delphi survey or a "Real-Time" Delphi survey to which stakeholders will be allocated at random. Consensus meetings will take place by video conference to allow for an international group of stakeholder representatives to discuss and vote on the outcomes to include in the final core outcome set (COS). Discussion: More research is needed on treatments for neonatal encephalopathy. Standardising outcomes measured and reported in evaluations of the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of neonatal encephalopathy will improve evidence synthesis and improve results reported in systematic reviews and meta-analysis in this area. Overall, this COS will allow for improved treatments to be identified, heterogeneity in research to be reduced, and overall patient care to be enhanced.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Core outcomes in neonatal encephalopathy: a qualitative study with parents
    (BMJ, 2022) Quirke, Fiona; Ariff, Shabina; Battin, Malcolm; Bernard, Caitlin; Bloomfield, Frank H.; Daly, Mandy; Devane, Declan; Haas, David M.; Healy, Patricia; Hurley, Tim; Kibet, Vincent; Kirkham, Jamie J.; Koskei, Sarah; Meher, Shireen; Molloy, Eleanor; Niaz, Maira; Ní Bhraonáin, Elaine; Omukagah Okaronon, Christabell; Tabassum, Farhana; Walker, Karen; Biesty, Linda; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Objective: To identify the outcomes considered important to parents or caregivers of infants diagnosed with neonatal encephalopathy, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy or birth asphyxia in high-income and low- to middle-income countries (LMiCs), as part of the outcome-identification process in developing a core outcome set (COS) for the treatment of neonatal encephalopathy. Design: A qualitative study involving 25 semistructured interviews with parents or other family members (caregivers) of infants who were diagnosed with, and treated for, neonatal encephalopathy, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy or birth asphyxia. Setting: Interviews were conducted in high-income countries (HiCs) (n=11) by Zoom video conferencing software and in LMiCs (n=14) by phone or face to face. Findings: Parents identified 54 outcomes overall, which mapped to 16 outcome domains. The domains identified were neurological outcomes, respiratory outcomes, gastrointestinal outcomes, cardiovascular outcomes, motor development, cognitive development, development (psychosocial), development (special senses), cognitive development, development (speech and social), other organ outcomes, survival/living outcomes, long-term disability, hospitalisation, parent-reported outcomes and adverse events. Conclusions: This study provides insight into the outcomes that parents of infants diagnosed with neonatal encephalopathy have identified as the most important, to be considered in the process of developing a COS for the treatment of neonatal encephalopathy. We also provide description of the processes employed to ensure the inclusion of participants from LMiCs as well as HiCs.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ILL best practices: streamlining & greening
    (2012-11-14) Baich, Tina; Baker, Christine A.; Walker, Karen
    This program will provide ILL practitioners with ideas to help them streamline and green their operations. Key topics to be discussed will include streamlining with technology by using features of WorldCat Resource Sharing, Odyssey standalone, Article Exchange, etc.; streamlining manual workflows within IN-Share and Evergreen libraries and reducing waste in ILL by greening the process.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
    (Springer Nature, 2021-02-15) Quirke, Fiona A.; Healy, Patricia; Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní; Daly, Mandy; Biesty, Linda; Hurley, Tim; Walker, Karen; Meher, Shireen; Haas, David M.; Bloomfield, Frank H.; Kirkham, Jamie J.; Molloy, Eleanor J.; Devane, Declan; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Background: The Delphi method is used in a wide variety of settings as a method of building consensus on important issues. Traditionally, the Delphi method uses multiple rounds of a survey to allow for feedback of other participants' survey responses in between rounds. By informing participants about how others answer a question or prioritise specific topics, it allows for diverse opinions to inform the consensus process. For this reason, the Delphi method is popular as a consensus building approach in developing core outcome sets (COS), i.e. the minimum agreed set of standardised outcomes that should be measured and reported in studies on a specific health condition. In a COS setting, participants prioritise the importance of outcomes for inclusion in a COS. This usually involves participating in multiple rounds of a survey that can span several weeks or months. Challenges with participant retention have been highlighted in previous COS. We will compare a three-round with a Real-Time Delphi approach on prioritised outcomes. This trial is embedded within the COHESION study which is developing a COS for interventions treating neonatal encephalopathy. Methods: One hundred and eighty stakeholders (parents/caregivers of infants diagnosed and treated with neonatal encephalopathy, healthcare providers and researchers) will be randomised using stratified randomisation to take part in either the Multi-Round or Real-Time Delphi. Stakeholders will rate the importance of the same set of outcomes in both arms. We will compare the prioritised outcomes at the end of both surveys as well as other parameters such as feedback, initial condition and iteration effects. Discussion: This trial will provide evidence to inform decisions on the use of Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi survey methods.