scholarly journals A Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Labels in the United States: 2006 to 2010

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ari Gnanasakthy ◽  
Margaret Mordin ◽  
Marci Clark ◽  
Carla DeMuro ◽  
Sheri Fehnel ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 420-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ari Gnanasakthy ◽  
Margaret Mordin ◽  
Emily Evans ◽  
Lynda Doward ◽  
Carla DeMuro

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanti Seaman ◽  
Diane Brown ◽  
Ann Eno ◽  
Sile Yu ◽  
Allan B. Massie ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Transplantation of HIV-positive (HIV+) donor organs for HIV+ recipients (HIV D+/R+) is now being performed as research in the United States, but raises ethical concerns. While patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly used to evaluate clinical interventions, there is no published measure to aptly capture patients’ experiences in the unique context of experimental HIV D+/R+ transplantation. Therefore, we developed PROMETHEUS (patient-reported measure of experimental transplants with HIV and ethics in the United States). To do so, we created a conceptual framework, drafted a pilot battery using existing and new measures related to this context, and refined it based on cognitive and pilot testing. PROMETHEUS was administered 6-months post-transplant in a clinical trial evaluating these transplants. We analyzed data from the first 20 patient-participants for reliability and validity by calculating Cronbach’s alpha and reviewing item performance characteristics. Results PROMETHEUS 1.0 consisted of 29 items with 5 putative subscales: Emotions; Trust; Decision Making; Transplant; and Decision Satisfaction. Overall, responses were positive. Cronbach’s alpha was > 0.8 for all subscales except Transplant, which was 0.38. Two Transplant subscale items were removed due to poor reliability and construct validity. Conclusions We developed PROMETHEUS to systematically capture patient-reported experiences with this novel experimental transplantation program, nested it in an actual clinical trial, and obtained preliminary data regarding its performance.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S142-S143
Author(s):  
M. Zettler ◽  
C. Brown-Bickerstaff ◽  
K. Savill ◽  
A. Gajra ◽  
B. Feinberg

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-160
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Watchmaker ◽  
Sean Legler ◽  
Dianne De Leon ◽  
Vanessa Pascoe ◽  
Robert Stavert

Background: Although considered a tropical disease, strongyloidiasis may be encountered in non-endemic regions, primarily amongst immigrants and travelers from endemic areas.  Chronic strongyloides infection may be under-detected owing to its non-specific cutaneous presentation and the low sensitivity of commonly used screening tools. Methods: 18 consecutive patients with serologic evidence of strongyloides infestation who presented to a single urban, academic dermatology clinic between September 2013 and October 2016 were retrospectively included.  Patient age, sex, country of origin, strongyloides serology titer, absolute eosinophil count, presenting cutaneous manifestations, and patient reported subjective outcome of pruritus after treatment were obtained via chart review.  Results: Of the 18 patients, all had non-specific pruritic dermatoses, 36% had documented eosinophila and none were originally from the United States. A majority reported subjective improvement in their symptoms after treatment. Conclusion:  Strongyloides infection and serologic testing should be considered in patients living in non-endemic regions presenting with pruritic dermatoses and with a history of exposure to an endemic area.Key Points:Chronic strongyloidiasis can be encountered in non-endemic areas and clinical manifestations are variableEosinophilia was not a reliable indicator of chronic infection in this case series Dermatologists should consider serologic testing for strongyloidiasis in patients with a history of exposure and unexplained pruritus


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa M. Coles ◽  
Adrian F. Hernandez ◽  
Bryce B. Reeve ◽  
Karon Cook ◽  
Michael C. Edwards ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives There has been limited success in achieving integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials. We describe how stakeholders envision a solution to this challenge. Methods Stakeholders from academia, industry, non-profits, insurers, clinicians, and the Food and Drug Administration convened at a Think Tank meeting funded by the Duke Clinical Research Institute to discuss the challenges of incorporating PROs into clinical trials and how to address those challenges. Using examples from cardiovascular trials, this article describes a potential path forward with a focus on applications in the United States. Results Think Tank members identified one key challenge: a common understanding of the level of evidence that is necessary to support patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in trials. Think Tank participants discussed the possibility of creating general evidentiary standards depending upon contextual factors, but such guidelines could not be feasibly developed because many contextual factors are at play. The attendees posited that a more informative approach to PROM evidentiary standards would be to develop validity arguments akin to courtroom briefs, which would emphasize a compelling rationale (interpretation/use argument) to support a PROM within a specific context. Participants envisioned a future in which validity arguments would be publicly available via a repository, which would be indexed by contextual factors, clinical populations, and types of claims. Conclusions A publicly available repository would help stakeholders better understand what a community believes constitutes compelling support for a specific PROM in a trial. Our proposed strategy is expected to facilitate the incorporation of PROMs into cardiovascular clinical trials and trials in general.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document