Outcome classification

Patient-reported outcome.

There are four different archetypes of patient outcomes that have been described:

expected successes, unexpected failures, unexpected successes, and expected failures 1).

Outcomes can be observed in the short term, medium term, and long term.

Short term outcome

Medium term outcome

Long term outcome

Clinical outcome

Functional outcome

Neurological outcome

Neuropsychological outcome

Main outcomes

The main outcomes are the essential outcomes for decision-making, and are those that would form the basis of a ‘Summary of findings’ table. ‘Summary of findings’ tables provide key information about the amount of evidence for important comparisons and outcomes, the quality of the evidence and the magnitude of effect

There should be no more than seven main outcomes, which should generally not include surrogate or interim outcomes. They should not be chosen on the basis of any anticipated or observed magnitude of effect, or because they are likely to have been addressed in the studies to be reviewed.

Primary outcomes

Primary outcomes for the review should be identified from among the main outcomes. Primary outcomes are the outcomes that would be expected to be analysed should the review identify relevant studies, and conclusions about the effects of the interventions under review will be based largely on these outcomes. There should in general be no more than three primary outcomes and they should include at least one desirable and at least one undesirable outcome (to assess beneficial and adverse effects respectively).

Secondary outcomes

Main outcomes not selected as primary outcomes would be expected to be listed as secondary outcomes. In addition, secondary outcomes may include a limited number of additional outcomes the review intends to address. These may be specific to only some comparisons in the review. For example, laboratory tests and other surrogate measures may not be considered as main outcomes as they are less important than clinical endpoints in informing decisions, but they may be helpful in explaining effect or determining intervention integrity.

The urgent need for outcomes research was highlighted in the early 1980s, when researchers discovered that “geography is destiny.”

see Scores

see Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus outcome.

Bohnen JD, Chang ÃDC, Lillemoe KD. Reconceiving the Morbidity and Mortality Conference in an Era of Big Data. Ann Surg. 2016;263(5):2015-2017. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001508.
  • outcome_classification.txt
  • Last modified: 2022/10/18 10:31
  • by