REFERENCES
1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700.
2. Williamson PR, Altman DG, Bagley H, Barnes KL, Blazeby JM, Brookes ST, et al. The COMET Handbook: version 1.0. Trials. 2017;18(Suppl 3):280.
3. Dodd S, Clarke M, Becker L, Mavergames C, Fish R, Williamson PR. A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;96:84-92.
4. Mantziari S, Demartines N. Poor outcome reporting in medical research; building practice on spoilt grounds. Ann Transl Med. 2017;5(Suppl 1):S15.
5. Dadouch R, Hall C, Du Mont J, D’Souza R. Obesity in Pregnancy - Patient-Reported Outcomes in Qualitative Research: A Systematic Review
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d’obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC. 2019;JOGCANADA-D-19-00159R2 - accepted 11/Sep/2019.
6. Hall C, D’Souza R. Patients and healthcare providers identify imporant outcomes for research on pergnancy and heart disease. . Can J Cardiol. 2020;(submited).
7. Dadouch R, Rosen C, Dong SJ, Maxwell C, D’Souza R, Parsons J. Determining gaps and challenges in treatment and care for pregnant women with elevated body mass index: qualitative research with healthcare users and professionals. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d’obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC. 2020;(submitted).
8. Dadouch R, Faheim M, Susini O, Sedra S, Showell M, D’Souza R, et al. Variation in outcome reporting in studies on obesity in pregnancy-A systematic review. Clin Obes. 2019:e12341.
9. Hall C, Shishkina A, Thurman R, Pal A, Horn D, D’Souza R. Outcome reporting in studies on pregnant women with cardiac disease: a systematic review. Canadian Journal of Cardiology. 2020;(submitted).
10. Butcher NJ, Monsour A, Mew EJ, Szatmari P, Pierro A, Kelly LE, et al. Improving outcome reporting in clinical trial reports and protocols: study protocol for the Instrument for reporting Planned Endpoints in Clinical Trials (InsPECT). Trials. 2019;20(1):161.
11. Heneghan C, Goldacre B, Mahtani KR. Why clinical trial outcomes fail to translate into benefits for patients. Trials. 2017;18(1):122.
12. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Julian Higgins SG, editor. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 ed: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
13. Gargon E, Gorst SL, Harman NL, Smith V, Matvienko-Sikar K, Williamson PR. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 4th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research. PLoS One. 2018;13(12):e0209869.
14. D’Souza R. Outcome Reporting in Obstetric Studies (OROS) Project Toronto, Canada: Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Toronto; 2019 [Available from: https://www.obgyn.utoronto.ca/oros-project.
15. Duffy JMN, Hirsch M, Ziebland S, McManus RJ, International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in P-e. Methodological decisions influence the identification of potential core outcomes in pre-eclampsia related studies: a sensitivity analysis informing the development of guidelines for future core outcome set developers. BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology. 2019.
16. D’Souza R, Ashraf R, Seo Y, Seyoum M, Windrim R, Kingdom J, et al., editors. Core Outcome Sets for Obstetric Conditions: a critical review. American College of Obstetrics & Gynecology Annual Scientific Meeting; 2019; Seatlle, WA: Obstet Gynecol (submitted).
17. Metadata and Vocabularies: Cochrane Linked Data; [Available from: https://linkeddata.cochrane.org/linked-data-project/metadata-and-vocabularies.
18. Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2014 [updated 2014. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
19. Yudkin JS, Lipska KJ, Montori VM. The idolatry of the surrogate. BMJ. 2011;343:d7995.
20. D’Agostino RB, Jr. Debate: The slippery slope of surrogate outcomes. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med. 2000;1(2):76-8.
21. la Cour JL, Brok J, Gotzsche PC. Inconsistent reporting of surrogate outcomes in randomised clinical trials: cohort study. BMJ. 2010;341:c3653.
22. Freedman L, Nica A, Huszti E, D’Souza R. Determining the Impact of Journal Abstract Structure and Word Limit on the Completeness of Study Reporting. Obstet Gynecol; Seattle, WA, USA2020.
23. Meher S, Alfirevic Z. Choice of primary outcomes in randomised trials and systematic reviews evaluating interventions for preterm birth prevention: a systematic review. BJOG. 2014;121(10):1188-94; discussion 95-6.
24. Rosenbloom JI, Lewkowitz AK, Lindley KJ, Nelson DM, Macones GA, Cahill AG, et al. Expectant Management of Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy and Future Cardiovascular Morbidity. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(1):27-35.
25. (WHO) WHO. WHO handbook for guideline development. Geneva: WHO; 2012.
26. Tudur Smith C, Hickey H, Clarke M, Blazeby J, Williamson P. The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise. Trials. 2014;15:32.
27. Clarke M. Standardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviews. Trials. 2007;8:39.
28. Rahimi K, Malhotra A, Banning AP, Jenkinson C. Outcome selection and role of patient reported outcomes in contemporary cardiovascular trials: systematic review. BMJ. 2010;341:c5707.
29. Townsend R, Sileo F, Stocker L, Kumbay H, Healy P, Gordijn S, et al. Variation in outcome reporting in randomized controlled trials of interventions for prevention and treatment of fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;53(5):598-608.
30. DeMets DL, Psaty BM, Fleming TR. When Can Intermediate Outcomes Be Used as Surrogate Outcomes? JAMA. 2020.
31. Herman D, Qadree A, Lor K, D’Souza R. Composite Adverse Outcomes in Obstetric Studies: a systematic review. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Annual Scientific Meeting; Seattle, WA: Obstet Gynecol (submitted); 2019.
32. Khan K. The CROWN Initiative: journal editors invite researchers to develop core outcomes in women’s health. BJOG. 2014;121(10):1181-2.
33. Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, Devane D, Gargon E, et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012;13:132.
34. Hartling L, Hamm MP, Milne A, Vandermeer B, Santaguida PL, Ansari M, et al. Testing the risk of bias tool showed low reliability between individual reviewers and across consensus assessments of reviewer pairs. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(9):973-81.