Survey eligibility was self-identification as a health care provider to cancer patients, or PRO researcher. Recipients were encouraged to share the information with other individuals who fit the eligibility criteria. We partnered with our study Stakeholder Advisory Board to distribute the survey link to a variety of target populations in order to achieve diversity among respondents. We invited oncology clinicians and PRO researchers to complete the online survey by recruiting a convenience sample using a “snow-ball” approach. Our objective was to evaluate interpretation accuracy, clarity, and preferences for these candidate presentation approaches in a broad population of clinicians and PRO researchers.
#BEHOLDER NAMES TRIAL#
In the context of a clinical trial randomizing patients to one of the two treatment groups, we addressed between-group comparisons of mean scores over time, and between-group comparisons of the proportions of patients changed from baseline (improved, stable, or worsened). In this study, we focused on the reporting of PROs from clinical trials to clinicians and PRO researchers, building on our earlier study findings that identified the visual presentation strategies with the greatest potential for effective data communication. In a separate research stream, we focused on the communication of PROs to patients (e.g., in educational materials or decision aids). We then partnered with stakeholder workgroups of clinicians and patients to develop improved graphical presentation approaches. Previously, we evaluated existing approaches to presenting study PRO results. This study was part of a larger research program designed to examine approaches for presenting PRO data to promote their understanding and use. This understanding can be challenging because of the variety of PRO questionnaires, variation in their scoring (e.g., higher scores indicating better or worse outcomes), their scaling (e.g., scores ranging from 0 to 100 as worst-to-best, or scores normed to a defined population), and how statistical and clinical significance of the findings are addressed. The optimal integration of PRO results from clinical trials, and other comparative research into clinical care requires that clinicians understand and interpret PROs accurately and be able to communicate PRO findings to their patients where appropriate. Oncologists have endorsed the use of PROs for this purpose, and there is evidence that PRO results can influence treatment choices. PROs can inform patient care in a variety of ways, including data representing ‘the voice of the patient’ in randomized clinical trials to inform decision-making by patients and clinicians based on trial results. An emphasis on patient-centered care has increased the demand for patient-reported outcomes (PROs), data collected directly from patients about health conditions and impacts of treatments.
0 kommentar(er)
