Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.782355
Title: Core outcome set development for clinical trials : understanding how qualitative research approaches can help to accommodate outcomes that are important to patients
Author: Jones, Janet Eileen
ISNI:       0000 0004 7967 9609
Awarding Body: University of Birmingham
Current Institution: University of Birmingham
Date of Award: 2019
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Thesis embargoed until 31 Aug 2020
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
The thesis aims were twofold (1) to understand how qualitative approaches can inform Core Outcome Set (COS) development and (2) to compare the utility of three qualitative data collection methods for understanding which outcomes are important to patients. Firstly, a review examining the participation of patients in COS development and the use of qualitative research was conducted. Secondly, evidence from studies comparing the use of face-to-face and online focus groups was reviewed. Finally, the outputs of qualitative data collected from adult burns patients using (1) face-to-face focus groups (2) online focus groups, and (3) interviews, was compared according to the outcomes elicited, sample characteristics, depth of data and resource use. The first review demonstrates that whilst patients and carers participated in outcome elicitation for COS development, professionals were overly represented in prioritisation exercises. Of 10 qualitative papers identified only 3 were a clearly pre-designed component of the COS. The second review suggests that both face-to-face and online focus groups have advantages dependent on the context for their use. A similar range of outcomes relevant to adult burns patients were identified regardless of the qualitative data collection method. Whilst interviews produced more in-depth data, online focus groups used the least resource.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.782355  DOI: Not available
Keywords: RA Public aspects of medicine
Share: