...
首页> 外文期刊>Trials >Developing core outcomes sets: methods for identifying and including patient-reported outcomes (PROs)
【24h】

Developing core outcomes sets: methods for identifying and including patient-reported outcomes (PROs)

机译:开发核心结果集:识别和包括患者报告结果(PRO)的方法

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Synthesis of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data is hindered by the range of available PRO measures (PROMs) composed of multiple scales and single items with differing terminology and content. The use of core outcome sets, an agreed minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported in all trials of a specific condition, may improve this issue but methods to select core PRO domains from the many available PROMs are lacking. This study examines existing PROMs and describes methods to identify health domains to inform the development of a core outcome set, illustrated with an example. Methods Systematic literature searches identified validated PROMs from studies evaluating radical treatment for oesophageal cancer. PROM scale/single item names were recorded verbatim and the frequency of similar names/scales documented. PROM contents (scale components/single items) were examined for conceptual meaning by an expert clinician and methodologist and categorised into health domains. A patient advocate independently checked this categorisation. Results Searches identified 21 generic and disease-specific PROMs containing 116 scales and 32 single items with 94 different verbatim names. Identical names for scales were repeatedly used (for example, ‘physical function’ in six different measures) and others were similar (overlapping face validity) although component items were not always comparable. Based on methodological, clinical and patient expertise, 606 individual items were categorised into 32 health domains. Conclusion This study outlines a methodology for identifying candidate PRO domains from existing PROMs to inform a core outcome set to use in clinical trials.
机译:背景病人报告的结局(PRO)数据的综合受到多种可用PRO措施(PROM)的阻碍,这些措施由多种规模和具有不同术语和内容的单个项目组成。核心结果集的使用(在特定条件下的所有试验中均应测量和报告的公认的最小结果集)可能会改善此问题,但缺乏从许多可用的PROM中选择核心PRO域的方法。这项研究检查了现有的PROM,并描述了识别健康域的方法,以告知核心结果集的发展,并举例说明。方法系统性文献检索从评估食道癌根治性治疗的研究中确定了经验证的PROM。逐字记录了PROM秤/单个项目的名称,并记录了类似名称/秤的频率。专业的临床医生和方法学家检查了PROM内容(比例成分/单个项目)的概念意义,并将其分类为健康领域。耐心的拥护者独立检查了这一分类。结果搜索确定了21种通用和特定疾病的PROM,它们包含116个量表和32个具有94个不同逐字名称的单个项目。重复使用相同的量表名称(例如,在六个不同度量中使用“物理功能”),而其他量表则相似(重叠面部有效性),尽管组成项目并不总是可比的。根据方法,临床和患者专业知识,将606个单独项目分为32个健康领域。结论本研究概述了一种从现有PROMs中识别候选PRO域的方法,以告知一组可用于临床试验的核心结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号