{
  "abstract": "Selecting meaningful functional outcomes for child health evaluative research amidst a scarcity of fit-for-purpose measures is a persistent dilemma. Functional measures assess a child’s physical functioning, for example, mobility or self-care activities. In this viewpoint, we will integrate current discourses with our experience as child health researchers in the context of selecting patient-important outcomes and related measures for a large, allied health cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). The CHESS (CHildren’s Early Self-care Support) trial, funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme, seeks to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an allied health intervention to support self-care in young children (1–4 years and 6 months) with neurodisability. 1 This discussion sits within the widely agreed enduring uncertainty about what constitutes meaningful trial outcomes, for whom, in what circumstances and how best to measure them.2",
  "authors": [
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK",
        "UCL, London, England, UK",
        "Peninsula Childhood Disability Research Unit (PenCRU), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK"
      ],
      "name": "Phillip Harniess"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, England, UK"
      ],
      "name": "Jennifer McAnuff"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, England, UK"
      ],
      "name": "Niina Kolehmainen"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Selecting meaningful functional outcomes and measures: a persistent dilemma in child health trials",
  "uid": "d6024ee8-86b5-58bf-8203-fbf79a1b50a2"
}