Screenshot of text and a table. Chen et al., “The most common patient-centred outcomes were quality of life, satisfaction or patient experience, self-management or self-care, depression or mental health, physical function or exercise capacity, cost-effectiveness, cognitive function, adherence, empowerment and hospitalisations.” The table then presents the outcomes from the core outcome sets and the number of studies in Chen et al. (2026) that report this outcome (max. n=25) (Health-related) Quality of Life 9 Mental Health 4 Mortality Adverse Events 1 Development of New Comorbidity 0 Health-risk Behaviour 0 Adherence to Treatment 2 Health-care Cost (out of pocket) 4 Number of studies based on those reported in Chen et al. (Tables 2 & 3), so it may be that some of the less usual outcomes such as health-care cost were not extracted by the team of the systematic review. On the other hand, “cost” is coded inclusively as not all studies assessed out-of-pocket cost (not relevant in all health care systems). The table also codes which outcomes are drawn from which core outcome set, which was unfortunately difficult to describe - here are the references to the sets: 1 Smith et al. (2018). The Annals of Family Medicine, 16, 132–138. 2 “Intervention” in Vidyasagaran et al. (2024). BMJ Global Health, 9, Article e015120. 3 “Prevention” in Vidyasagaran et al. (2024). BMJ Global Health, 9, Article e015120.
A #SysReview exploring impacts of community-based interventions for adults with #multimorbidity on clinical and patient-reported outcomes (25 studies):
bmjpublichealth.bmj.com/content/4/1/...
Quick comparison of identified outcomes with the two central #CoreOutcomeSets 👇
#HRQOL #Psychometrics
