↓ Skip to main content

The COMET Handbook: version 1.0

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
176 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
1236 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
601 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The COMET Handbook: version 1.0
Published in
Trials, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-1978-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula R. Williamson, Douglas G. Altman, Heather Bagley, Karen L. Barnes, Jane M. Blazeby, Sara T. Brookes, Mike Clarke, Elizabeth Gargon, Sarah Gorst, Nicola Harman, Jamie J. Kirkham, Angus McNair, Cecilia A. C. Prinsen, Jochen Schmitt, Caroline B. Terwee, Bridget Young

Abstract

The selection of appropriate outcomes is crucial when designing clinical trials in order to compare the effects of different interventions directly. For the findings to influence policy and practice, the outcomes need to be relevant and important to key stakeholders including patients and the public, health care professionals and others making decisions about health care. It is now widely acknowledged that insufficient attention has been paid to the choice of outcomes measured in clinical trials. Researchers are increasingly addressing this issue through the development and use of a core outcome set, an agreed standardised collection of outcomes which should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all trials for a specific clinical area.Accumulating work in this area has identified the need for guidance on the development, implementation, evaluation and updating of core outcome sets. This Handbook, developed by the COMET Initiative, brings together current thinking and methodological research regarding those issues. We recommend a four-step process to develop a core outcome set. The aim is to update the contents of the Handbook as further research is identified.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 176 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 601 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 601 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 82 14%
Researcher 78 13%
Student > Master 75 12%
Student > Bachelor 47 8%
Other 39 6%
Other 114 19%
Unknown 166 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 219 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 47 8%
Social Sciences 25 4%
Psychology 23 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 2%
Other 68 11%
Unknown 207 34%