Which clinical research questions are the most important? Development and preliminary validation of the Australia & New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT)

William J Taylor; Robin Willink; Denise A O'Connor; Vinay Patel; Allison Bourne; Ian A Harris; Samuel L Whittle; Bethan Richards; Ornella Clavisi; Sally Green; Rana S Hinman; Chris G Maher; Ainslie Cahill; Annie McPherson; Charlotte Hewson; Suzie E May; Bruce Walker; Philip C Robinson; Davina Ghersi; Tania Winzenberg; Jane Fitzpatrick; Kieran Fallon; Paul Glasziou; Laurent Billot; Rachelle Buchbinder

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0281308

Back

Which clinical research questions are the most important? Development and preliminary validation of the Australia & New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT)

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Which clinical research questions are the most important? Development and preliminary validation of the Australia & New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT)

William J Taylor, Robin Willink, Denise A O'Connor, Vinay Patel, Allison Bourne, Ian A Harris, Samuel L Whittle, Bethan Richards, Ornella Clavisi, Sally Green, …

PloS one, Vol.18(3), Art. e0281308

2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281308

PMID: 36930668

Files and links (1)

pdf

Published998.33 kBDownload View

CC BY V4.0, Open Access

Abstract

Australia

Consensus

Humans

New Zealand

Publications

Reproducibility of Results

Background and aims High quality clinical research that addresses important questions requires significant resources. In resource-constrained environments, projects will therefore need to be prioritized. The Australia and New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network aimed to develop a stakeholder-based, transparent, easily implementable tool that provides a score for the ‘importance’ of a research question which could be used to rank research projects in order of importance. Methods Using a mixed-methods, multi-stage approach that included a Delphi survey, consensus workshop, inter-rater reliability testing, validity testing and calibration using a discrete-choice methodology, the Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT) was developed. The tool incorporated broad stakeholder opinion, including consumers, at each stage and is designed for scoring by committee consensus. Results The ANZMUSC-RQIT tool consists of 5 dimensions (compared to 6 dimensions for an earlier version of RQIT): (1) extent of stakeholder consensus, (2) social burden of health condition, (3) patient burden of health condition, (4) anticipated effectiveness of proposed intervention, and (5) extent to which health equity is addressed by the research. Each dimension is assessed by defining ordered levels of a relevant attribute and by assigning a score to each level. The scores for the dimensions are then summed to obtain an overall ANZMUSC-RQIT score, which represents the importance of the research question. The result is a score on an interval scale with an arbitrary unit, ranging from 0 (minimal importance) to 1000. The ANZMUSC-RQIT dimensions can be reliably ordered by committee consensus (ICC 0.73–0.93) and the overall score is positively associated with citation count (standardised regression coefficient 0.33, p<0.001) and journal impact factor group (OR 6.78, 95% CI 3.17 to 14.50 for 3rd tertile compared to 1st tertile of ANZMUSC-RQIT scores) for 200 published musculoskeletal clinical trials. Conclusion We propose that the ANZMUSC-RQIT is a useful tool for prioritising the importance of a research question.

Details

Title: Which clinical research questions are the most important? Development and preliminary validation of the Australia & New Zealand Musculoskeletal (ANZMUSC) Clinical Trials Network Research Question Importance Tool (ANZMUSC-RQIT)
Authors/Creators: William J Taylor - University of Otago
Robin Willink - University of Otago
Denise A O'Connor - Monash University
Vinay Patel - University of Otago
Allison Bourne - Monash University
Ian A Harris - Ingham Institute
Samuel L Whittle - Monash University
Bethan Richards - UNSW Sydney
Ornella Clavisi - Australian Institute for Musculoskeletal Science
Sally Green - Monash University
Rana S Hinman - RMIT University
Chris G Maher - Institute for Musculoskeletal Health
Ainslie Cahill - Arthritis Australia
Annie McPherson - Australia and New Zealand Banking Group
Charlotte Hewson - Australia and New Zealand Banking Group
Suzie E May - Australia and New Zealand Banking Group
Bruce Walker - Emeritus Professor in the College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education (SHEE), Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA, Australia
Philip C Robinson - The University of Queensland
Davina Ghersi - National Health and Medical Research Council
Tania Winzenberg - University of Tasmania
Jane Fitzpatrick - The University of Melbourne
Kieran Fallon - Australian National University
Paul Glasziou - Bond University
Laurent Billot - The George Institute for Global Health
Rachelle Buchbinder - Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Victoria, Australia
Publication Details: PloS one, Vol.18(3), Art. e0281308
Identifiers: 991005568768907891
Murdoch Affiliation: Murdoch University
Language: English
Resource Type: Journal article

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Metrics

41 File views/ downloads

82 Record Views

2 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Citation topics: 1 Clinical & Life Sciences; 1.129 Back pain; 1.129.98 Low Back Pain
Web Of Science research areas: Multidisciplinary Sciences
ESI research areas: Clinical Medicine