AMD outcomes important for patients- Delphi study

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    AMD outcomes important for patients- Delphi study Development of core outcome measures for AMD interventions

  • IRAS ID

    191342

  • Contact name

    Augusto/AAB Azuara-Blanco

  • Contact email

    a.azuara-blanco@qub.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Queen's University Belfast

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 10 months, 29 days

  • Research summary

    Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide information on effectiveness of new treatments for medical conditions (e.g. for age-related macular degeneration (AMD)) measuring different outcomes. To improve design of trials for a condition, a selection of a group of standard outcomes known as a core outcome set (COS), would be helpful. Our efforts focus around a COS for AMD RCTs. To choose the most appropriate elements for a COS, opinions of key stakeholders (patients, carers and experts) need to be gathered. Thus, in our current study, we would like to achieve consensus among patients regarding the importance and acceptability of different eye tests’ measures and patient-reported outcomes. We aim to conduct 2-3 consecutive questionnaires with feedback for participants between rounds. Surveys will be administered in a timely way giving 4 weeks for participants to respond. Our plan is to recruit 200 AMD patients with impaired vision via the Macular Society research database. The Macular Society will identify potential participants, but it will be up to them if they would like to take part in our study or not. The surveys will be either online (Survey Monkey link emailed to the participants, participants redirected to the survey- Survey Monkey complies with the rules of accessibility for people with impaired vision ) or postal based, depending on preferences of a particular individual.

  • REC name

    West Midlands - Coventry & Warwickshire Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/WM/0451

  • Date of REC Opinion

    14 Dec 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion