Towards a core outcome set (COS) for intrinsic capacity (IC) intervention studies in adults in midlife and beyond: a scoping review to identify frequently used outcomes and measurement tools.

Aging Clin Exp Res

WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Ageing, Division of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

Published: March 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • A review was done to find out what results and tools are used in studies about an intervention called "IC" (which stands for something specific) to help create a standard set of outcomes for future research.
  • They looked at 699 studies and ended up focusing on 7 that met their criteria, finding 28 different outcomes related to IC.
  • The most common outcome measured was the change in IC levels after treatment, and many studies also looked at how physical performance and depression changed.

Article Abstract

This scoping review was conducted to identify the outcomes and measurement tools used in IC intervention studies, as first step towards the development of a core outcome set (COS) for IC trials. PRISMA-ScR and COS-STAD were followed. The review considered randomized controlled trials targeting IC published in Medline, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and clinicaltrials.gov, until June 2023. Of 699 references, 534 studies were screened once duplicates were removed, 15 were assessed for eligibility, and 7 (4 articles and 3 protocols) met eligibility criteria. Twenty-eight outcomes were identified (19 related to IC and its domains and 9 unrelated). The most reported primary outcome was the change in IC levels postintervention (5 over 7 studies) and the most reported outcomes (either as primary and/or secondary) were the changes in physical performance and in depressive symptoms (6 over 7 studies). Fifty-five tools used to construct the domains' z-scores and/or assess the effect of interventions were identified (47 related to IC and its domains and 8 unrelated). The most reported tool was an IC Z-score, calculated by 4 domains' z-scores: locomotor, vitality, cognitive, and psychological (5 over 7 studies). The tools differed among studies (10 locomotor related, 6 vitality related, 16 cognitive related, 8 psychological related, 6 sensorial related, 8 unrelated tools). The vast heterogeneity (28 outcomes and 55 tools within 7 studies) highlighted the need of a COS. These outcomes and tools will be presented to experts in a future step, to select the ones that should be taken into consideration in IC trials.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10914863PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40520-023-02681-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

core outcome
8
outcome set
8
set cos
8
studies
8
intervention studies
8
scoping review
8
outcomes measurement
8
measurement tools
8
controlled trials
8
identified domains
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!