Skip to main content
Trials logoLink to Trials
. 2015 Nov 11;16:515. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-1038-x

The COMET initiative database: progress and activities update (2014)

Elizabeth Gargon 1,, Paula R Williamson 1, Doug G Altman 2, Jane M Blazeby 3, Mike Clarke 4
PMCID: PMC4642751  PMID: 26558998

Abstract

The COMET Initiative database is a repository of studies relevant to the development of core outcome sets (COS). Use of the website continues to increase, with more than 16,500 visits in 2014 (36 % increase over 2013), 12,257 unique visitors (47 % increase), 9780 new visitors (43 % increase) and a rise in the proportion of visits from outside the UK (8565 visits; 51 % of all visits). By December 2014, a total of 6588 searches had been completed, with 2383 in 2014 alone (11 % increase). The growing awareness of the need for COS is reflected in the website and database usage figures. 

Keywords: Core outcome set, database, resources

Findings

Background

The Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) website and database were launched in August 2011, and the progress and activities up to 31 December 2013 were reported in Trials last year [1]. This letter outlines subsequent progress in 2014 (Source of data usage: Google Analytics). It provides data on the value and use of the COMET materials and on the interest in core outcome sets (COS) above and beyond what might be gleaned through, for example, data on the citation of key articles. COS represent the minimum outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a specific condition and may also be suitable for use in other types of research and clinical audit [2].

Activity and content

On 31 December 2014, 567 studies relevant to the development of COS were included in the COMET database, up from 306 at the end of 2013. These included a total of 80 planned and ongoing studies, and the database had been boosted considerably by the addition of studies identified through a systematic review of core outcome sets that identified 198 published COS [3]. Usage statistics show that the number of visits increased from 12,332 during 2013 to 16,768 in 2014: a 36 % increase. The number of unique visitors increased by 47 % from 8369 in 2013 to 12,257 in 2014, and the number of new visitors, by 43 % from 6844 in 2013 to 9780 in 2014. Full details are provided in Table 1. There was a 38 % increase in page views from 2013 to 2014 (53,226 to 73,617 page views). By December 2014, a total of 6588 searches of the database had been run (Fig. 1), with 2383 in 2014 alone. The sustained growth in use suggests that the COMET website and database are continuing to gain interest and prominence and that they are an effective resource for people interested in core outcome set development.

Table 1.

Usage statistics 2013-2014

Number of visits Number of unique visitors Number of new visitors
2011 2012 2013 2014 2011 2012 2013 2014 2011 2012 2013 2014
January - 670 1069 1282 - 450 657 985 - 385 542 842
February - 762 1017 1052 - 463 648 849 - 378 525 736
March - 649 1238 1221 - 429 761 942 - 358 617 406
April - 683 1050 1244 - 466 678 961 - 395 564 831
May - 659 1088 1113 - 407 721 774 - 330 504 622
June - 435 1403 1043 - 305 887 714 - 260 703 569
July - 472 945 1203 - 314 650 783 - 241 526 614
August 804 457 833 1673 503 324 576 1160 494 273 480 969
September 448 483 901 1604 314 347 623 1146 286 288 524 942
October 460 669 984 1832 295 516 802 1365 258 441 689 1135
November 686 1117 966 2260 484 854 727 1621 437 757 619 1338
December 580 926 838 1241 409 596 639 957 363 505 551 776
2978 7982 12332 16768 2005 5471 8369 12257 1838 4611 6844 9780

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Cumulative number of completed searches in the COMET database (2011-2014)

As in previous years, most visits to the website were direct or via a search engine. Thirteen percent of all visits in 2014 were referrals, including Twitter (15 %), The Italian Cochrane Centre (6 %), MRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research (6 %), The University of Liverpool (5 %), BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (5 %), and Nature (4 %). The COMET IV meeting was jointly hosted by the Italian Cochrane Centre in Rome in November 2014, which reflects the large group of referrals from the Italian Cochrane Centre website; demonstrating how effective collaborative efforts can promote COMET. The Nature referrals can be explained by an editorial in Nature Medicine in August 2014 [4], demonstrating the impact of this type of high profile exposure.

Analyses of the COMET website data show that 57 % of visitors went beyond the page on which they landed. As in previous years, the most common first interaction was to complete a search in the COMET database. Other first interactions included moving to the page providing an overview of the COMET Initiative, accessing the database but without completing a search, and visiting the pages containing details of the COMET IV meeting or the COMET resources page. The Core Resource Pack is the second most highly accessed resource on the website (after the database), with 1064 page views in 2014, compared to 780 in 2013.

The content of the website continues to be updated regularly. In 2014, we extended the patient and public involvement resources beyond the Plain Language Summary that was available. There is now a Delphi Process Plain Language Summary, along with a Public Involvement Strategy outlining the COMET public involvement objectives and plans. In 2014, the plain language summary page was visited 301 times, and the Public Involvement page was visited 138 times since it was launched in August to December 2014.

The number of countries represented by visitors increased from a total of 113 in 2013 to 123 in 2014. A list of the 123 countries represented by visitors to the website in 2014 is shown in Appendix 1. This increase in the international use of the website and database is also reflected in the proportion of visits. In 2013, 59 % of the visits were from the United Kingdom (7256 of 12,332 visits). In 2014, the percentage of visits from the UK decreased to 49 % (8203 of 16768 visits), whereas visits from the United States and Canada rose to 16 % (from 12 % in 2013) and visits from the rest of the world increased to 35 % (29 % in 2013). This increase in visits from countries outside the UK reinforces COMET as an international initiative and demonstrates an increased global awareness and interest in core outcome sets and the COMET Initiative. Table 2 shows the ten countries with the most visits to the COMET website from 2012 to 2014. The presence of Japan in 2013 and India in 2014 reflects where COMET activities were undertaken, including the COMET workshop in Kyoto (2013) and the presence of the Cochrane Colloquium in Hyderabad (2014) [4]. This highlights the importance of international dissemination, but it is worth noting that all content and materials are provided in the English language only at the moment, and there are no immediate plans for translation.

Table 2.

Countries represented by the most visits to the COMET website in 2012, 2013, and 2014

2012 2013 2014
United Kingdom 5,577 United Kingdom 7,526 United Kingdom 8,203
United States 431 United States 1,022 United States 2,038
Canada 326 Canada 501 Italy 1,115
Australia 201 Australia 321 Canada 624
Germany 186 Italy 315 Germany 581
Netherlands 166 Netherlands 308 Netherlands 510
Italy 161 Germany 285 Australia 494
France 125 Japan 228 France 374
Ireland 113 France 227 India 306
Norway 62 Ireland 159 Ireland 239

As noted above, 6588 searches have been completed in the database since its launch in August 2011 to December 2014, with 2383 in 2014. The search allows the user to take a structured approach to finding COS, and the most frequently used search criteria in 2014 were consistent with previous years. Disease category (74 %) was the most frequently used, followed by disease name (47 %), study type (30 %), type of intervention (26 %), methods used (25 %), and stakeholders involved (24 %). The most commonly searched terms were ‘cancer’ (n = 129), ‘mental health’ (n = 116), ‘pregnancy and childbirth’ (n = 86), and ‘neurology’ (n = 82).

Plans for the future

An update of our systematic review of core outcome sets [2] is planned for early 2015. This will help to keep the database up to date and ensure that it is an effective resource for users. As before, we continue to identify and include studies in an ad hoc way to keep the database current. A pop-up survey is planned for 2015 to gather information from users in order to evaluate how and why people are using the database. This will allow us, for example, to consider ways to improve the search functions available. Other activities for 2015 include the first COMET meeting (COMET V) to be held outside of Europe, in Calgary, Canada, in May. Finally, we plan to expand the patient and public involvement resources available on the website, and this will be a priority for the newly formed COMET Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) working group.

The COMET website and database usage figures will continue to be monitored and assessed annually.

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the MRC MRP (Medical Research Council Methodology Research Panel), grant number MR/J004847/1; and European Union Seventh Framework Programme ([FP7/2007-2013] [FP7/2007-2011]) under grant agreement n° 305081.

Abbreviations

COMET

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials

COS

core outcome set(s)

Appendix 1

Table 3.

Countries represented by the site visitors in 2014 (n = 123)

Algeria Iceland Philippines
Argentina India Poland
Australia Indonesia Portugal
Austria Iran Puerto Rico
Bahamas* Iraq Qatar
Bahrain Ireland Romania
Bangladesh Israel Russia
Belarus Italy Saudi Arabia
Belgium Jamaica Serbia
Bhutan* Japan Singapore
Bolivia* Jersey Slovakia
Bosnia & Herzegovina Jordan Slovenia
Botswana* Kazakhstan South Africa
Brazil Kenya South Korea
Bulgaria Kuwait Spain
Cameroon Latvia Sri Lanka
Canada Lebanon Sudan
Cayman Islands Lithuania Swaziland*
Chile Luxembourg Sweden
China Macau Switzerland
Colombia Macedonia (FYROM)* Syria*
Costa Rica Madagascar* Taiwan
Croatia Malawi Tanzania
Cyprus Malaysia Thailand
Czech Republic Maldives Trinidad & Tobago
Denmark Malta Tunisia*
Dominican Republic Mauritius* Turkey
Ecuador Mexico Uganda
Egypt Montenegro* Ukraine
Estonia Morocco United Arab Emirates
Ethiopia Myanmar (Burma) United Kingdom
Finland Namibia* United States
France Nepal Venezuela
Gambia* Netherlands Vietnam
Georgia New Zealand Yemen
Germany Nigeria Zambia
Ghana* Northern Mariana Islands* Zimbabwe
Greece Norway
Guadeloupe* Oman
Haiti* Pakistan
Honduras* Palestine*
Hong Kong Panama*
Hungary Peru

*New to 2014

Footnotes

Competing interests

DA, JB, MC, and PW are members of the COMET Management Group and co-applicants on grants to support COMET and related work. EG is a member of the COMET Management Group and is the COMET Project Coordinator.

Authors’ contributions

EG and MC conceived the idea for the report. EG performed the analysis. EG, PW, MC, JB, and DA interpreted the data. EG wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Contributor Information

Elizabeth Gargon, Email: e.gargon@liv.ac.uk.

Paula R. Williamson, Email: prw@liverpool.ac.uk

Doug G. Altman, Email: doug.altman@csm.ox.ac.uk

Jane M. Blazeby, Email: J.M.Blazeby@bristol.ac.uk

Mike Clarke, Email: m.clarke@qub.ac.uk.

References

  • 1.Gargon E, Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M. The COMET initiative database: progress and activities from 2011 to 2013. Trials. 2014;15:279. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Clarke M. Standardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviews. Trials. 2007;8:39. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-8-39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Gargon E, Gurung B, Medley N, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, et al. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9:e99111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Keener AB. Group seeks standardization for what clinical trials must measure. Nat Med. 2014;20:798–9. doi: 10.1038/nm0814-798. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Trials are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES