PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: There is considerable diversity of outcome selections and methodologies for handling the multiple outcomes across all systematic reviews (SRs) of Interdisciplinary Pain Treatment (IPT) due to the complexity. This diversity presents difficulties for healthcare decision makers. Better recommendations about how to select outcomes in SRs (with or without meta-analysis) are needed to explicitly demonstrate the effectiveness of IPT.
UNASSIGNED: This overview systematically collates the reported outcomes and measurements of IPT across published SRs and identifies the methodological characteristics. Additionally, we provide some suggestions on framing the selection of outcomes and on conducting SRs of IPT.
UNASSIGNED: Three electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos) and the PROSPERO registry for ongoing SR were supplemented with hand-searching ending on 30 September 2021.
UNASSIGNED: We included 18 SRs with data on 49007 people from 356 primary randomised controlled trials (RCTs); eight were followed by meta-analysis and ten used narrative syntheses of data. For all the SRs, pain was the most common reported outcome (72%), followed by disability/functional status (61%) and working status (61%). Psychological well-being and quality of life were also reported in half of the included SR (50%). The core outcome domains according to VAPAIN, IMMPACT, and PROMIS were seldom met. The methodological quality varied from critically low to moderate according to AMSTAR2. The AMSTAR2 rating was negatively correlated to the number of outcome domains in PROMIS, and VAPAIN was positively correlated with IMMPACT and PROMIS, indicating the intercorrelations between the reported outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic overview showed wide-ranging disparity in reported outcomes and applied outcome domains in SRs evaluating IPT interventions for chronic pain conditions. The intercorrelations between the reported outcomes should be appropriately handled in future research. Some approaches are discussed as well.
UNASSIGNED: This overview systematically collates the reported outcomes and measurements of IPT across published SRs and identifies the methodological characteristics. Additionally, we provide some suggestions on framing the selection of outcomes and on conducting SRs of IPT.
UNASSIGNED: Three electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos) and the PROSPERO registry for ongoing SR were supplemented with hand-searching ending on 30 September 2021.
UNASSIGNED: We included 18 SRs with data on 49007 people from 356 primary randomised controlled trials (RCTs); eight were followed by meta-analysis and ten used narrative syntheses of data. For all the SRs, pain was the most common reported outcome (72%), followed by disability/functional status (61%) and working status (61%). Psychological well-being and quality of life were also reported in half of the included SR (50%). The core outcome domains according to VAPAIN, IMMPACT, and PROMIS were seldom met. The methodological quality varied from critically low to moderate according to AMSTAR2. The AMSTAR2 rating was negatively correlated to the number of outcome domains in PROMIS, and VAPAIN was positively correlated with IMMPACT and PROMIS, indicating the intercorrelations between the reported outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic overview showed wide-ranging disparity in reported outcomes and applied outcome domains in SRs evaluating IPT interventions for chronic pain conditions. The intercorrelations between the reported outcomes should be appropriately handled in future research. Some approaches are discussed as well.
摘要：
UNASSIGNED：由于复杂性，在跨学科疼痛治疗（IPT）的所有系统评价（SRs）中，处理多个结果的结果选择和方法具有相当大的多样性。这种多样性给医疗保健决策者带来了困难。需要关于如何在SRs中选择结果（有或没有荟萃分析）的更好建议，以明确证明IPT的有效性。
UNASSIGNED：本概述系统地整理了已发布的SRs中IPT的报告结果和测量结果，并确定了方法学特征。此外,我们为制定结果选择和进行IPTSRs提供了一些建议。
UNASSIGNED：三个电子数据库（PubMed，科克伦图书馆,和Epistemonikos）和正在进行的SR的PROSPERO注册表得到了补充，手工搜索于2021年9月30日结束。
UNASSIGNED：我们纳入了来自356项主要随机对照试验（RCT）的49007人的18个SR数据；8个随后是荟萃分析和10个使用的叙述性数据综合。对于所有的SR，疼痛是最常见的报告结局（72%），其次是残疾/功能状态(61%)和工作状态(61%)。其中一半的SR（50％）也报告了心理健康和生活质量。根据VAPAIN的核心结果域，IMMPACT,和PROMIS很少被满足。根据AMSTAR2，方法学质量从极低到中等不等。AMSTAR2评分与PROMIS中结果域的数量呈负相关，VAPAIN与IMMPACT和PROMIS呈正相关，表明报告结果之间的相互关系。
UNASSIGNED：该系统概述显示，在评估IPT干预措施对慢性疼痛状况的SRs中，报告的结果和应用的结果领域存在广泛差异。报告的结果之间的相互关系应在未来的研究中适当处理。还讨论了一些方法。
UNASSIGNED：本概述系统地整理了已发布的SRs中IPT的报告结果和测量结果，并确定了方法学特征。此外,我们为制定结果选择和进行IPTSRs提供了一些建议。
UNASSIGNED：三个电子数据库（PubMed，科克伦图书馆,和Epistemonikos）和正在进行的SR的PROSPERO注册表得到了补充，手工搜索于2021年9月30日结束。
UNASSIGNED：我们纳入了来自356项主要随机对照试验（RCT）的49007人的18个SR数据；8个随后是荟萃分析和10个使用的叙述性数据综合。对于所有的SR，疼痛是最常见的报告结局（72%），其次是残疾/功能状态(61%)和工作状态(61%)。其中一半的SR（50％）也报告了心理健康和生活质量。根据VAPAIN的核心结果域，IMMPACT,和PROMIS很少被满足。根据AMSTAR2，方法学质量从极低到中等不等。AMSTAR2评分与PROMIS中结果域的数量呈负相关，VAPAIN与IMMPACT和PROMIS呈正相关，表明报告结果之间的相互关系。
UNASSIGNED：该系统概述显示，在评估IPT干预措施对慢性疼痛状况的SRs中，报告的结果和应用的结果领域存在广泛差异。报告的结果之间的相互关系应在未来的研究中适当处理。还讨论了一些方法。
