Scoping review of outcome measures in cleft care used in research and reports

Treatment outcome measures are critical in the decision making of best practices in the OFC field. OFC consortium working groups provided standardization of outcome measures based on previous treatment outcome studies. However, the implementation of such standardization in OFC centres worldwide is u...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Orthodontics & craniofacial research 2024-06, Vol.27 (S1), p.42-48
Hauptverfasser: Sarilita, Erli, Sjamsudin, Endang, Mossey, Peter A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 48
container_issue S1
container_start_page 42
container_title Orthodontics & craniofacial research
container_volume 27
creator Sarilita, Erli
Sjamsudin, Endang
Mossey, Peter A.
description Treatment outcome measures are critical in the decision making of best practices in the OFC field. OFC consortium working groups provided standardization of outcome measures based on previous treatment outcome studies. However, the implementation of such standardization in OFC centres worldwide is unknown. This study presented mapped outcome measures in cleft care using a structured review method complemented by quantitative overview of the relevant published research to provide initial guidelines for the implementation of treatment outcome standardization. A scoping review of the literature of treatment outcomes in cleft care following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines was performed. The selected indexed paper in outcome measures mapped following the international consortium in standard set of outcome measures in cleft care. Three hundred and sixty‐five articles were filtered. The most discussed domains of cleft care were dental and oral health, appearance and speech/communication. Overall, the majority of publications were produced in high‐income countries. The current review indicates that there are inequalities of treatment outcome studies among the domain of cleft care. In addition, there are also inequalities of published articles from HIC versus LMIC in treatment outcomes. This information can be used to develop targeted interventions aimed at encouraging cleft centres worldwide to adapt standardized outcome measures.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/ocr.12711
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2870142726</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3053800595</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-9ac5851cac0bfa84ae596c0700440cd81d6b394f4e0da3e181f040d16a0d61fa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoVqsH_4AEvOihdmaTze4epfgFSsGPc0izs7qyu6lJ19J_b7Tag2Auk5l5eBhexo4QzjG-sbP-HJMMcYvtoQIcKSHF9uYv0gHbD-ENIIEkUbtsILJMZTkWe-z-0bp53b1wTx81LbmruOsX1rXEWzKh9xR43XHbULXg1njifaDyaxQ3ZLx95aYrYzN3fhEO2E5lmkCHP3XInq8unyY3o7vp9e3k4m5khcxxVBib5ilaY2FWmVwaSgtlIQOQEmyZY6lmopCVJCiNIMyxAgklKgOlwsqIITtde-fevfcUFrqtg6WmMR25PugkzwBlkiUqoid_0DfX-y5epwWkIgdIizRSZ2vKeheCp0rPfd0av9II-itjHTPW3xlH9vjH2M9aKjfkb6gRGK-BZd3Q6n-Tnk4e1spPkhOEeQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3053800595</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Scoping review of outcome measures in cleft care used in research and reports</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Sarilita, Erli ; Sjamsudin, Endang ; Mossey, Peter A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sarilita, Erli ; Sjamsudin, Endang ; Mossey, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><description>Treatment outcome measures are critical in the decision making of best practices in the OFC field. OFC consortium working groups provided standardization of outcome measures based on previous treatment outcome studies. However, the implementation of such standardization in OFC centres worldwide is unknown. This study presented mapped outcome measures in cleft care using a structured review method complemented by quantitative overview of the relevant published research to provide initial guidelines for the implementation of treatment outcome standardization. A scoping review of the literature of treatment outcomes in cleft care following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines was performed. The selected indexed paper in outcome measures mapped following the international consortium in standard set of outcome measures in cleft care. Three hundred and sixty‐five articles were filtered. The most discussed domains of cleft care were dental and oral health, appearance and speech/communication. Overall, the majority of publications were produced in high‐income countries. The current review indicates that there are inequalities of treatment outcome studies among the domain of cleft care. In addition, there are also inequalities of published articles from HIC versus LMIC in treatment outcomes. This information can be used to develop targeted interventions aimed at encouraging cleft centres worldwide to adapt standardized outcome measures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1601-6335</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1601-6343</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12711</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37767819</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Cleft Lip - therapy ; Cleft Palate - therapy ; Clinical outcomes ; Consortia ; Decision making ; Humans ; Literature reviews ; Meta-analysis ; orofacial cleft ; Outcome Assessment, Health Care ; review ; Standardization ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Orthodontics &amp; craniofacial research, 2024-06, Vol.27 (S1), p.42-48</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. Orthodontics &amp; Craniofacial Research published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-9ac5851cac0bfa84ae596c0700440cd81d6b394f4e0da3e181f040d16a0d61fa3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4678-2744 ; 0000-0002-9914-6901</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Focr.12711$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Focr.12711$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37767819$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sarilita, Erli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sjamsudin, Endang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mossey, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><title>Scoping review of outcome measures in cleft care used in research and reports</title><title>Orthodontics &amp; craniofacial research</title><addtitle>Orthod Craniofac Res</addtitle><description>Treatment outcome measures are critical in the decision making of best practices in the OFC field. OFC consortium working groups provided standardization of outcome measures based on previous treatment outcome studies. However, the implementation of such standardization in OFC centres worldwide is unknown. This study presented mapped outcome measures in cleft care using a structured review method complemented by quantitative overview of the relevant published research to provide initial guidelines for the implementation of treatment outcome standardization. A scoping review of the literature of treatment outcomes in cleft care following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines was performed. The selected indexed paper in outcome measures mapped following the international consortium in standard set of outcome measures in cleft care. Three hundred and sixty‐five articles were filtered. The most discussed domains of cleft care were dental and oral health, appearance and speech/communication. Overall, the majority of publications were produced in high‐income countries. The current review indicates that there are inequalities of treatment outcome studies among the domain of cleft care. In addition, there are also inequalities of published articles from HIC versus LMIC in treatment outcomes. This information can be used to develop targeted interventions aimed at encouraging cleft centres worldwide to adapt standardized outcome measures.</description><subject>Cleft Lip - therapy</subject><subject>Cleft Palate - therapy</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Consortia</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>orofacial cleft</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment, Health Care</subject><subject>review</subject><subject>Standardization</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1601-6335</issn><issn>1601-6343</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoVqsH_4AEvOihdmaTze4epfgFSsGPc0izs7qyu6lJ19J_b7Tag2Auk5l5eBhexo4QzjG-sbP-HJMMcYvtoQIcKSHF9uYv0gHbD-ENIIEkUbtsILJMZTkWe-z-0bp53b1wTx81LbmruOsX1rXEWzKh9xR43XHbULXg1njifaDyaxQ3ZLx95aYrYzN3fhEO2E5lmkCHP3XInq8unyY3o7vp9e3k4m5khcxxVBib5ilaY2FWmVwaSgtlIQOQEmyZY6lmopCVJCiNIMyxAgklKgOlwsqIITtde-fevfcUFrqtg6WmMR25PugkzwBlkiUqoid_0DfX-y5epwWkIgdIizRSZ2vKeheCp0rPfd0av9II-itjHTPW3xlH9vjH2M9aKjfkb6gRGK-BZd3Q6n-Tnk4e1spPkhOEeQ</recordid><startdate>202406</startdate><enddate>202406</enddate><creator>Sarilita, Erli</creator><creator>Sjamsudin, Endang</creator><creator>Mossey, Peter A.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4678-2744</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9914-6901</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202406</creationdate><title>Scoping review of outcome measures in cleft care used in research and reports</title><author>Sarilita, Erli ; Sjamsudin, Endang ; Mossey, Peter A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-9ac5851cac0bfa84ae596c0700440cd81d6b394f4e0da3e181f040d16a0d61fa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Cleft Lip - therapy</topic><topic>Cleft Palate - therapy</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Consortia</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>orofacial cleft</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment, Health Care</topic><topic>review</topic><topic>Standardization</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sarilita, Erli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sjamsudin, Endang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mossey, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Orthodontics &amp; craniofacial research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sarilita, Erli</au><au>Sjamsudin, Endang</au><au>Mossey, Peter A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Scoping review of outcome measures in cleft care used in research and reports</atitle><jtitle>Orthodontics &amp; craniofacial research</jtitle><addtitle>Orthod Craniofac Res</addtitle><date>2024-06</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>S1</issue><spage>42</spage><epage>48</epage><pages>42-48</pages><issn>1601-6335</issn><eissn>1601-6343</eissn><abstract>Treatment outcome measures are critical in the decision making of best practices in the OFC field. OFC consortium working groups provided standardization of outcome measures based on previous treatment outcome studies. However, the implementation of such standardization in OFC centres worldwide is unknown. This study presented mapped outcome measures in cleft care using a structured review method complemented by quantitative overview of the relevant published research to provide initial guidelines for the implementation of treatment outcome standardization. A scoping review of the literature of treatment outcomes in cleft care following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines was performed. The selected indexed paper in outcome measures mapped following the international consortium in standard set of outcome measures in cleft care. Three hundred and sixty‐five articles were filtered. The most discussed domains of cleft care were dental and oral health, appearance and speech/communication. Overall, the majority of publications were produced in high‐income countries. The current review indicates that there are inequalities of treatment outcome studies among the domain of cleft care. In addition, there are also inequalities of published articles from HIC versus LMIC in treatment outcomes. This information can be used to develop targeted interventions aimed at encouraging cleft centres worldwide to adapt standardized outcome measures.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>37767819</pmid><doi>10.1111/ocr.12711</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4678-2744</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9914-6901</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1601-6335
ispartof Orthodontics & craniofacial research, 2024-06, Vol.27 (S1), p.42-48
issn 1601-6335
1601-6343
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2870142726
source MEDLINE; Wiley Journals
subjects Cleft Lip - therapy
Cleft Palate - therapy
Clinical outcomes
Consortia
Decision making
Humans
Literature reviews
Meta-analysis
orofacial cleft
Outcome Assessment, Health Care
review
Standardization
Treatment Outcome
title Scoping review of outcome measures in cleft care used in research and reports
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T08%3A14%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Scoping%20review%20of%20outcome%20measures%20in%20cleft%20care%20used%20in%20research%20and%20reports&rft.jtitle=Orthodontics%20&%20craniofacial%20research&rft.au=Sarilita,%20Erli&rft.date=2024-06&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=S1&rft.spage=42&rft.epage=48&rft.pages=42-48&rft.issn=1601-6335&rft.eissn=1601-6343&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ocr.12711&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3053800595%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3053800595&rft_id=info:pmid/37767819&rfr_iscdi=true