Download PDFPDF

Development of a core outcome set for congenital pulmonary airway malformations: study protocol of an international Delphi survey
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Development of a core outcome set for congenital pulmonary airway malformations
    • Sergei M Hermelijn, PhD-student / Surgical resident Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
    • Other Contributors:
      • Casper M Kersten, PhD-student
      • Dhanya Mullassery, Pediatric Surgeon
      • Nagarajan Muthialu, Cardiothoracic Surgeon
      • Nazan Cobanoglu, Pediatric pulmonologist
      • Silvia Gartner, Pediatric pulmonologist
      • Pietro Bagolan, Pediatric Surgeon
      • Carmen Mesas Burgos, Pediatric surgeon
      • Alberto Sgro, Pediatric Surgeon
      • Stijn Heyman, Pediatric surgeon
      • Holger Till, Pediatric surgeon
      • Janne Suominen, Pediatric surgeon
      • Maarten Schurink, Pediatric surgeon
      • Liesbeth Desender, Pediatric Surgeon
      • Paul Losty, Pediatric surgeon
      • Kjetil Ertresvag, Pediatric surgeon
      • Harm A W M Tiddens, Pediatric pulmonologist
      • Rene M H Wijnen, Pediatric surgeon
      • J Marco Schnater, Pediatric surgeon
      • on behalf of the CONNECT study consortium COS development group, -

    We highly appreciate that Hall and colleagues have critically reviewed our protocol and acknowledge their concerns regarding the lack patient and public involvement (PPI). We are aware of the COS-STAD recommendations and have carefully considered PPI. Nevertheless, we ultimately decided not to include parental input in the Delphi process. The most important consideration was that parents of asymptomatic patients may have difficulty providing input on desired outcome measures, since most of them are not confronted with symptoms or complications. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge, patient societies or support groups for CPAM patients are scarce and widespread. This makes it difficult to establish an unbiased general opinion on the most important outcome parameters for this patient-group. Moreover, gathering a well-balanced and unbiased patient panel could prove to take a considerable amount of time. We would rather put this time to use in the development of clinical trials, since currently no prospective outcome studies have been published yet. Having said this, we intend to incorporate PPI in the development of clinical studies, thus including their essential input in the study design. We believe we have adequately addressed the concerns of our colleagues, and trust we can count on them for future collaboration in the field of congenital lung disease.

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Exclusion of parents' and patients' views risks futility and sends the wrong message
    • Nigel J Hall, Associate Professor, Paediatric Surgery Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton
    • Other Contributors:
      • Erin Walker, Patient Insight and Involvement Lead
      • Kirstie Haywood, Reader (Patient Reported Outcomes)
      • Esther Crawley, Professor of Child Health
      • Heather Barrington, PPI Co-ordinator
      • Frances Sherratt, Research Associate
      • Bridget Young, Professor of Psychology
      • Nick Lansdale, Paediatric Surgeon

    We read with interest your protocol to develop a core outcome set (COS) for congenital pulmonary airway malformations and applaud your intention to develop a COS for this population of children. We wish to highlight one area about which we have significant concerns, which is your decision to specifically exclude parents' and patients' views from your Delphi process.

    There are strong arguments for involving patients' and parents' views in COS development. Only by specifically including them can researchers be certain that outcomes of particular importance to patients and parents have at least an opportunity of being represented in the COS. The specific exclusion of these important stakeholders risks not only excluding outcomes that are most important to this vital stakeholder group but also risks sending completely the wrong message to patients and parents. By deliberately excluding this group the researchers risk sending the message to patients and parents that their views simply don’t matter.

    To ensure that important considerations such as this are not overlooked during COS development, the COS-STAD set of standards has been developed. A specific recommendation is that ‘COS developers should involve those who have experienced or who are affected by the condition (e.g., patients, family members, and carers)’. The authors of this protocol claim to have developed it in accordance with the COS-STAD guidance yet do not appear to incorporated...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.