Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data The PRISMA-IPD Statement

IMPORTANCE Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD) aim to collect, check, and reanalyze individual-level data from all studies addressing a particular research question and are therefore considered a gold standard approach to evidence synthesis. They are likely to be used with increasing frequency as current initiatives to share clinical trial data gain momentum and may be particularly important in reviewing controversial therapeutic areas.

OBJECTIVE To develop PRISMA-IPD as a stand-alone extension to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement, tailored to the specific requirements of reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD. Although developed primarily for reviews of randomized trials, many items will apply in other contexts, including reviews of diagnosis and prognosis.

DESIGN Development of PRISMA-IPD followed the EQUATOR Network framework guidance and used the existing standard PRISMA Statement as a starting point to draft additional relevant material. A web-based survey informed discussion at an international workshop that included researchers, clinicians, methodologists experienced in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD, and journal editors. The statement was drafted and iterative refinements were made by the project, advisory, and development groups. The PRISMA-IPD Development Group reached agreement on the PRISMA-IPD checklist and flow diagram by consensus.

FINDINGS Compared with standard PRISMA, the PRISMA-IPD checklist includes 3 new items that address (1) methods of checking the integrity of the IPD (such as pattern of randomization, data consistency, baseline imbalance, and missing data), (2) reporting any important issues that emerge, and (3) exploring variation (such as whether certain types of individual benefit more from the intervention than others). A further additional item was created by reorganization of standard PRISMA items relating to interpreting results. Wording was modified in 23 items to reflect the IPD approach.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE PRISMA-IPD provides guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD.

COS-STAR: a reporting guideline for studies developing core outcome sets (protocol)

BACKGROUND: Core outcome sets can increase the efficiency and value of research and, as a result, there are an increasing number of studies looking to develop core outcome sets (COS). However, the credibility of a COS depends on both the use of sound methodology in its development and clear and transparent reporting of the processes adopted. To date there is no reporting guideline for reporting COS studies. The aim of this programme of research is to develop a reporting guideline for studies developing COS and to highlight some of the important methodological considerations in the process.

METHODS/DESIGN: The study will include a reporting guideline item generation stage which will then be used in a Delphi study. The Delphi study is anticipated to include two rounds. The first round will ask stakeholders to score the items listed and to add any new items they think are relevant. In the second round of the process, participants will be shown the distribution of scores for all stakeholder groups separately and asked to re-score. A final consensus meeting will be held with an expert panel and stakeholder representatives to review the guideline item list. Following the consensus meeting, a reporting guideline will be drafted and review and testing will be undertaken until the guideline is finalised. The final outcome will be the COS-STAR (Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting) guideline for studies developing COS and a supporting explanatory document.

DISCUSSION: To assess the credibility and usefulness of a COS, readers of a COS development report need complete, clear and transparent information on its methodology and proposed core set of outcomes. The COS-STAR guideline will potentially benefit all stakeholders in COS development: COS developers, COS users, e.g. trialists and systematic reviewers, journal editors, policy-makers and patient groups.

Evidence for the reliability and validity, but not the practical utility of the two-factor Consideration of Future Consequences Scale-14

Researchers have proposed 1-factor, 2-factor, and bifactor solutions to the 12-item Consideration of Future Consequences Scale (CFCS-12). In order to overcome some measurement problems and to create a robust and conceptually useful two-factor scale the CFCS-12 was recently modified to include two new items and to become the CFCS-14. Using a University sample, we tested four competing models for the CFCS-14: (a) a 12-item unidimensional model, (b) a model fitted for two uncorrelated factors (CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future), (c) a model fitted for two correlated factors (CFC-I and CFC-F), and (d) a bifactor model. Results suggested that the addition of the two new items has strengthened the viability of a two factor solution of the CFCS-14. Results of linear regression models suggest that the CFC-F factor is redundant. Further studies using alcohol and mental health indicators are required to test this redundancy.

The effects of new topical treatments on management of glaucoma in Scotland:An examination of ophthalmological health care

Background: The management of glaucoma has been changed in the past decade by the introduction of new drugs. The impact of these changes on clinical care of patients was examined by examining operation and prescribing rates for glaucoma in four geographical areas of Scotland for the years 1994 to 1999. Methods: A retrospective analysis of national health statistics: primary care prescribing data, hospital derived operation rates, consultant numbers, optometrist numbers, and eye test data, expressed by estimated population at risk of glaucoma. The outcome measures were prescribing volume and cost for glaucoma medications, and operation rates, corrected for population estimated to be at risk of glaucoma (PEG), for trabeculectomy, for Scotland as a whole, and for four geographical "regions" (north east, south east, central, and south west Scotland). Results: Prescribed items per 1000 population estimated to have glaucoma (PEG) increased by 24.9% between 1994 and 1999. This was above the general increase in prescribing in Scotland (17.8%). This increase varied in the four health regions evaluated (14.3% to 31.9%). Prescribing of topical ß blockers increased little (6.4%), but there was a large increase in the use of new products (topical prostaglandins, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, and a agonists), at the expense of miotics (47.7% fall), and older sympathomimetics. This change in prescribing pattern was accompanied by a 61.5% increase in cost (range 42.2% to 73.4% in the four regions). New drugs accounted for more than half of total glaucoma expenditure in 1999. Operation rates (corrected for PEG) fell by 45.9% (range 43.1 to 58.6%) between 1994 and 1999. Other indicators suggested increased activity in ophthalmic areas (for example, cataract operations, eye tests, numbers of optometrists and ophthalmic surgeons all increased). Within north east Scotland operation rates decreased and prescribing increased less than in other regions, both from lowest regional baseline in 1994. Conclusions: The introduction of new drug classes has had dramatic effects on the prescribing of glaucoma treatments. There has been a decline in older treatments and an increase in new agents, which has been associated with a large reduction in operation rates for glaucoma in Scotland over 6 years. Comparison of prescribing and operation data indicates regional differences in healthcare delivery for glaucoma.

Genome-wide gene pathway analysis of psychotic illness symptom dimensions based on a new schizophrenia-specific model of the OPCRIT

Empirically derived phenotypic measurements have the potential to enhance gene-finding efforts in schizophrenia. Previous research based on factor analyses of symptoms has typically included schizoaffective cases. Deriving factor loadings from analysis of only narrowly defined schizophrenia cases could yield more sensitive factor scores for gene pathway and gene ontology analyses. Using an Irish family sample, this study 1) factor analyzed clinician-rated Operational Criteria Checklist items in cases with schizophrenia only, 2) scored the full sample based on these factor loadings, and 3) implemented genome-wide association, gene-based, and gene-pathway analysis of these SCZ-based symptom factors (final N= 507). Three factors emerged from the analysis of the schizophrenia cases: a manic, a depressive, and a positive symptom factor. In gene-based analyses of these factors, multiple genes had q<. 0.01. Of particular interest are findings for PTPRG and WBP1L, both of which were previously implicated by the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium study of SCZ; results from this study suggest that variants in these genes might also act as modifiers of SCZ symptoms. Gene pathway analyses of the first factor indicated over-representation of glutamatergic transmission, GABA-A receptor, and cyclic GMP pathways. Results suggest that these pathways may have differential influence on affective symptom presentation in schizophrenia.

The Development and Testing of a New Version of the Cognitive Reflection Test Applying Item Response Theory (IRT)

The cognitive reflection test (CRT) is a short measure of a person's ability to resist intuitive response tendencies and to produce a normatively correct response, which is based on effortful reasoning. Although the CRT is a very popular measure, its psychometric properties have not been extensively investigated. A major limitation of the CRT is the difficulty of the items, which can lead to floor effects in populations other than highly educated adults. The present study aimed at investigating the psychometric properties of the CRT applying item response theory analyses (a two-parameter logistic model) and at developing a new version of the scale (the CRT-long), which is appropriate for participants with both lower and higher levels of cognitive reflection. The results demonstrated the good psychometric properties of the original, as well as the new scale. The validity of the new scale was also assessed by measuring correlations with various indicators of intelligence, numeracy, reasoning and decision-making skills, and thinking dispositions. Moreover, we present evidence for the suitability of the new scale to be used with developmental samples. Finally, by comparing the performance of adolescents and young adults on the CRT and CRT-long, we report the first investigation into the development of cognitive reflection.