Literature DB >> 23774513

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs): putting the patient perspective in patient-centered outcomes research.

Claire F Snyder1, Roxanne E Jensen, Jodi B Segal, Albert W Wu.   

Abstract

Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) aims to improve care quality and patient outcomes by providing information that patients, clinicians, and family members need regarding treatment alternatives, and emphasizing patient input to inform the research process. PCOR capitalizes on available data sources and generates new evidence to provide timely and relevant information and can be conducted using prospective data collection, disease registries, electronic medical records, aggregated results from prior research, and administrative claims. Given PCOR's emphasis on the patient perspective, methods to incorporate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are critical. PROs are defined by the US Food and Drug Administration as "Any report coming directly from patients… about a health condition and its treatment." However, PROs have not routinely been collected in a way that facilitates their use in PCOR. Electronic medical records, disease registries, and administrative data have only rarely collected, or been linked to, PROs. Recent technological developments facilitate the electronic collection of PROs and linkage of PRO data, offering new opportunities for putting the patient perspective in PCOR. This paper describes the importance of and methods for using PROs for PCOR. We (1) define PROs; (2) identify how PROs can be used in PCOR and the critical role of electronic data methods for facilitating the use of PRO data in PCOR; (3) outline the challenges and key unanswered questions that need to be addressed for the routine use of PROs in PCOR; and (4) discuss policy and research interventions to accelerate the integration of PROs with clinical data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23774513      PMCID: PMC3771694          DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1d84

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  30 in total

Review 1.  Quality of life assessment comes of age in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Authors:  A W Wu
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2000-07-07       Impact factor: 4.177

2.  Copyright and open access at the bedside.

Authors:  John C Newman; Robin Feldman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-12-29       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Lessons learned in the assessment of health-related quality of life: selected examples from the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.

Authors:  Michael Brundage; David Osoba; Andrea Bezjak; Dongsheng Tu; Michael Palmer; Joseph Pater
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  The American Urological Association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Measurement Committee of the American Urological Association.

Authors:  M J Barry; F J Fowler; M P O'Leary; R C Bruskewitz; H L Holtgrewe; W K Mebust; A T Cockett
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Measuring disease-specific quality of life in clinical trials.

Authors:  G H Guyatt; C Bombardier; P X Tugwell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1986-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Patient self-reports of symptoms and clinician ratings as predictors of overall cancer survival.

Authors:  Chantal Quinten; John Maringwa; Carolyn C Gotay; Francesca Martinelli; Corneel Coens; Bryce B Reeve; Henning Flechtner; Eva Greimel; Madeleine King; David Osoba; Charles Cleeland; Jolie Ringash; Joseph Schmucker-Von Koch; Martin J B Taphoorn; Joachim Weis; Andrew Bottomley
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Health-related quality of life among people with HIV disease: results from the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study.

Authors:  E G Bing; R D Hays; L P Jacobson; B Chen; S J Gange; N E Kass; J S Chmiel; S L Zucconi
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  The development of a clinical outcomes survey research application: Assessment Center.

Authors:  Richard Gershon; Nan E Rothrock; Rachel T Hanrahan; Liz J Jansky; Mark Harniss; William Riley
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-03-21       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 9.  Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; David Osoba; Albert W Wu; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Geoffrey R Norman
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.616

10.  The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why?

Authors:  Joanne Greenhalgh
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-12-23       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  81 in total

1.  Using patient-reported outcomes and PROMIS in research and clinical applications: experiences from the PCORI pilot projects.

Authors:  Clifton O Bingham; Susan J Bartlett; Peter A Merkel; Thelma J Mielenz; Paul A Pilkonis; Lauren Edmundson; Emily Moore; Rajeev K Sabharwal
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  A Review of HIV-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

Authors:  Kim Engler; David Lessard; Bertrand Lebouché
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Defining the value framework for prostate brachytherapy using patient-centered outcome metrics and time-driven activity-based costing.

Authors:  Nikhil G Thaker; Thomas J Pugh; Usama Mahmood; Seungtaek Choi; Tracy E Spinks; Neil E Martin; Terence T Sio; Rajat J Kudchadker; Robert S Kaplan; Deborah A Kuban; David A Swanson; Peter F Orio; Michael J Zelefsky; Brett W Cox; Louis Potters; Thomas A Buchholz; Thomas W Feeley; Steven J Frank
Journal:  Brachytherapy       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Overcoming barriers to implementing patient-reported outcomes in an electronic health record: a case report.

Authors:  Christopher A Harle; Alyson Listhaus; Constanza M Covarrubias; Siegfried Of Schmidt; Sean Mackey; Peter J Carek; Roger B Fillingim; Robert W Hurley
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 5.  Comparative effectiveness research in hand surgery.

Authors:  Shepard P Johnson; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Hand Clin       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 1.907

6.  Optimizing measurement of vision-related quality of life: a computerized adaptive test for the impact of vision impairment questionnaire (IVI-CAT).

Authors:  Eva K Fenwick; Bao Sheng Loe; Jyoti Khadka; Ryan E K Man; Gwyn Rees; Ecosse L Lamoureux
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-11-09       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 7.  [Health services research in intensive care medicine in Germany : Status quo and future challenges exemplified by acute pulmonary failure].

Authors:  S Blecha; S Weber-Carstens; T Bein
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.041

8.  A pilot study of population-based, patient-reported outcome collection in cancer survivors.

Authors:  Veenoo Agarwal; Nadia Corsini; Marion C Eckert; Greg Sharplin; Imogen Ramsey; Kate Gunn; Michael K Fitzgerald; Bogda Koczwara
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Multidisciplinary sleep centers: strategies to improve care of sleep disorders patients.

Authors:  Anita Valanju Shelgikar; Jeffrey S Durmer; Karen E Joynt; Eric J Olson; Heidi Riney; Paul Valentine
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 4.062

10.  Survey mode influence on patient-reported outcome scores in orthopaedic surgery: telephone results may be positively biased.

Authors:  Jon E Hammarstedt; John M Redmond; Asheesh Gupta; Kevin F Dunne; S Pavan Vemula; Benjamin G Domb
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-10-24       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.