Patient-reported outcome measures in core outcome sets targeted overlapping domains but through different instruments

被引:20
作者
Ciani, Oriana [1 ,2 ]
Salcher-Konrad, Maximilian [3 ,4 ]
Meregaglia, Michela [1 ]
Smith, Kathrine [5 ]
Gorst, Sarah L. [6 ]
Dodd, Susanna [6 ]
Williamson, Paula R. [6 ]
Fattore, Giovanni [1 ,7 ]
机构
[1] SDA Bocconi, Ctr Res Hlth & Social Care Management, Via Sarfatti 10, I-20136 Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Exeter, Evidence Synth & Modeling Hlth Improvement, Coll Med & Hlth, Exeter EX1 2LU, Devon, England
[3] London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, LSE Hlth, Houghton St, London WC2A 2AE, England
[4] London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, Care Policy & Evaluat Ctr, Houghton St, London WC2A 2AE, England
[5] Imperial Coll, London, England
[6] Univ Liverpool, Dept Hlth Data Sci, MRC NIHR Trials Methodol Res Partnership, Liverpool L69 3BX, Merseyside, England
[7] Bocconi Univ, Dept Social & Polit Sci, Via Sarfatti 36, I-20136 Milan, Italy
关键词
Core outcome set; COS; Patient-reported outcome measure; PRO; PROM; Outcomes research; CLINICAL-TRIALS; SYSTEMIC-SCLEROSIS; WORKING GROUP; HEALTH-CARE; CONSENSUS; GUIDELINES; STANDARDS; RECOMMENDATIONS; PERFORMANCE; ARTHRITIS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.003
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: There is no comprehensive assessment of which patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are recommended in core outcome sets (COS), and how they should be measured. The aims of this study are to review COS that include patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), identify their target health domains, main characteristics, and their overlap within and across different disease areas. Study design and setting: We selected COS studies collected in a publicly available database that included at least one recommended PROM. We gathered information on study setting, disease area, and targeted outcome domains. Full-text of recommended instruments were obtained, and an analysis of their characteristics and content performed. We classified targeted domains according to a predefined 38-item taxonomy. Results: Overall, we identified 94 COS studies that recommended 323 unique instruments, of which: 87% were included in only one COS; 77% were disease-specific; 1.5% preference-based; and 61% corresponded to a full questionnaire. Most of the instruments covered broad health-related constructs, such as global quality of life (25%), physical functioning (22%), emotional functioning and wellbeing (7%). Conclusion: The wealth of recommended instruments observed even within disease areas does not fit with a vision of systematic, harmonized collection of PROM data in COS within and across disease areas. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:26 / 36
页数:11
相关论文
共 58 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2009, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims
  • [2] Evaluation of outcomes in community-acquired pneumonia: a guide for patients, physicians, and policy-makers
    Barlow, GD
    Lamping, DL
    Davey, PG
    Nathwani, D
    [J]. LANCET INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2003, 3 (08) : 476 - 488
  • [3] Standards for Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measures
    Basch, Ethan
    Torda, Phyllis
    Adams, Karen
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2013, 310 (02): : 139 - 140
  • [4] Primary Outcomes for Resuscitation Science Studies A Consensus Statement From the American Heart Association
    Becker, Lance B.
    Aufderheide, Tom P.
    Geocadin, Romergryko G.
    Callaway, Clifton W.
    Lazar, Ronald M.
    Donnino, Michael W.
    Nadkarni, Vinay M.
    Abella, Benjamin S.
    Adrie, Christophe
    Berg, Robert A.
    Merchant, Raina M.
    O'Connor, Robert E.
    Meltzer, David O.
    Holm, Margo B.
    Longstreth, William T.
    Halperin, Henry R.
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2011, 124 (19) : 2158 - U267
  • [5] Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in tension-type headache: Second edition
    Bendtsen, L.
    Bigal, M. E.
    Cerbo, R.
    Diener, H. C.
    Holroyd, K.
    Lampl, C.
    Mitsikostas, D. D.
    Steiner, T. J.
    Tfelt-Hansen, P.
    [J]. CEPHALALGIA, 2010, 30 (01) : 1 - 16
  • [7] A Review of Generic Preference-Based Measures for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models
    Brazier, John
    Ara, Roberta
    Rowen, Donna
    Chevrou-Severac, Helene
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2017, 35 : S21 - S31
  • [8] Core outcome measurement instruments for clinical trials in nonspecific low back pain
    Chiarotto, Alessandro
    Boers, Maarten
    Deyo, Richard A.
    Buchbinder, Rachelle
    Corbin, Terry P.
    Costa, Leonardo O. P.
    Foster, Nadine E.
    Grotle, Margreth
    Koes, Bart W.
    Kovacs, Francisco M.
    Lin, C-W. Christine
    Maher, Chris G.
    Pearson, Adam M.
    Peul, Wilco C.
    Schoene, Mark L.
    Turk, Dennis C.
    van Tulder, Maurits W.
    Terwee, Caroline B.
    Ostelo, Raymond W.
    [J]. PAIN, 2018, 159 (03) : 481 - 495
  • [9] Value Lies in the Eye of the Patients: The Why, What, and How of Patient-reported Outcomes Measures
    Ciani, Oriana
    Federici, Carlo Baldassarre
    [J]. CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2020, 42 (01) : 25 - 33
  • [10] Arthritis in Systemic Sclerosis: Systematic Review of the Literature and Suggestions for the Performance of Future Clinical Trials in Systemic Sclerosis Arthritis
    Clements, Philip J.
    Allanore, Yannick
    Khanna, Dinesh
    Singh, Minjit
    Furst, Daniel E.
    [J]. SEMINARS IN ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 2012, 41 (06) : 801 - 814