@article{3196089,
    title = "Quality assessment of outcome reporting, publication characteristics and
overall methodological quality in trials on synthetic mesh procedures
for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse for development of core
outcome sets",
    author = "de Mattos Lourenco, Thais Regina and Pergialiotis, Vasilis and Durnea, and Constantin M. and Elfituri, Abdullatif and Haddad, Jorge Milhem and and Betschart, Cornelia and Falconi, Gabriele and Nygaard, Christiana and Campani and Doumouchtsis, Stergios K. and CHORUS Int Collaboration Harm",
    journal = "INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL AND PELVIC FLOOR DYSFUNCTION",
    year = "2021",
    volume = "32",
    number = "11",
    pages = "2913-2919",
    publisher = "Springer-Verlag London Ltd",
    doi = "10.1007/s00192-021-04749-3",
    keywords = "Pelvic organ prolapse; Mesh prolapse surgery; Core outcome sets;
Synthetic mesh",
    abstract = "Introduction and hypothesis Variations in outcome measures and reporting
of outcomes in trials on surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) using
synthetic mesh have been evaluated and reported. However, the quality of
outcome reporting, methodology of trials and their publication
parameters are important considerations in the process of development of
Core Outcome Sets. We aimed to evaluate these characteristics in
randomized controlled trials on surgery for POP using mesh. Methods
Secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials on surgical
treatments using synthetic mesh for POP previously included in a
systematic review developing an inventory of reported outcomes and
outcome measures. The methodological quality was investigated with the
modified Jadad criteria. Outcome reporting quality was evaluated with
the MOMENT criteria. Publication parameters included publishing journal,
impact factor and year of publication. Results Of the 71 previously
reviewed studies published from 2000 to 2017, the mean JADAD score was
3.59 and the mean MOMENT score was 4.63. Quality of outcomes (MOMENT)
was related to methodological quality (JADAD) (rho = 0.662; p = 0.000)
and to year of publication (rho = 0.262; p = 0.028). Conclusions
Methodological quality and outcome reporting quality appear correlated.
However, publication characteristics do not have strong associations
with the methodological quality of the studies. Evaluation of the
quality of outcomes, methodology and publication characteristics are all
an indispensable part of a staged process for the development of Core
Outcome and Outcome Measure Sets."
}