Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22903443›Full record

ArticleChinese journal of integrative medicine2013

Advising on Preferred Reporting Items for patient-reported outcome instrument development: the PRIPROID.

Zheng-Kun Hou, Feng-Bin Liu, Ji-Qian Fang, Xiao-Ying Li, Li-Juan Li, Chu-Hua Lin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zheng-Kun HouFirst Affiliation Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510405, China.
Feng-Bin Liu
Ji-Qian Fang
Xiao-Ying Li
Li-Juan Li
Chu-Hua Lin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe reporting of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instrument development is vital for both researchers and clinicians to determine its validity, thus, we propose the Preferred Reporting Items for PRO Instrument Development (PRIPROID) to improve the quality of reports.

methodsAbiding by the guidance published by the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network, we had performed 6 steps for items development: identified the need for a guideline, performed a literature review, obtained funding for the guideline initiative, identified participants, conducted a Delphi exercise and generated a list of PRIPROID items for consideration at the face-to-face meeting.

resultsTwenty three items subheadings under 7 topics were included: title and structured abstract, rationale, objectives, intention, eligibility criteria, conceptual framework, items generation, response options, scoring, times, administrative modes, burden assessment, properties assessment, statistical methods, participants, main results, and additional analysis, summary of evidence, limitations, clinical attentions, and conclusions, item pools or final form, and funding.

conclusionsThe PRIPROID contains many elements of the PRO research, and this assists researchers to report their results more accurately and to a certain degree use this instrument to evaluate the quality of the research methods.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Guidelines as TopicResearch ReportHumansResearch Support as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.