Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27020447›Full record

ReviewThe patient2016

Development of a Symptom-Based Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument for Functional Dyspepsia: A Preliminary Conceptual Model and an Evaluation of the Adequacy of Existing Instruments.

Fiona Taylor, David S Reasner, Robyn T Carson, Linda S Deal, Catherine Foley, Ramon Iovin, J Jason Lundy, Farrah Pompilus, Alan L Shields, Debra G Silberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The patient, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Fiona TaylorAdelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA.
David S ReasnerStudy Endpoints, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 301 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA. DReasner@IronwoodPharma.com.
Robyn T CarsonAllergan plc., Jersey City, NJ, USA.
Linda S DealPfizer, Collegeville, PA, USA.
Catherine FoleyAdelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA.
Ramon IovinAdelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA.
J Jason LundyOutcometrix, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Farrah PompilusAdelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA.
Alan L ShieldsAdelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA.
Debra G SilbergShire, Zug, Switzerland.

Funding

Critical Path InstituteU01FD003865 · FDA · CRITICAL PATH INSTITUTE · PI BRUMFIELD, MARTHA A · 2009 to 2013
$9.8M
FDA HHS U01 FD003865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim was to document, from the perspective of the empirical literature, the primary symptoms of functional dyspepsia (FD), evaluate the extent to which existing questionnaires target those symptoms, and, finally, identify any missing evidence that would impact the questionnaires' use in regulated clinical trials to assess treatment efficacy claims intended for product labeling.

methodsA literature review was conducted to identify the primary symptoms of FD and existing symptom-based FD patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. Following a database search, abstracts were screened and articles were retrieved for review. The primary symptoms of FD were organized into a conceptual model and the PRO instruments were evaluated for conceptual coverage as well as compared against evidentiary requirements presented in the FDA's PRO Guidance for Industry.

resultsFifty-six articles and 16 instruments assessing FD symptoms were reviewed. Concepts listed in the Rome III criteria for FD (n = 7), those assessed by existing FD instruments (n = 34), and symptoms reported by patients in published qualitative research (n = 6) were summarized in the FD conceptual model. Except for vomiting, all of the identified symptoms from the published qualitative research reports were also specified in the Rome III criteria. Only three of the 16 instruments, the Dyspepsia Symptom Severity Index (DSSI), Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI), and Short-Form Nepean Dyspepsia Index (SF-NDI), measure all seven FD symptoms defined by the Rome III criteria. Among these three, each utilizes a 2-week recall period and 5-point Likert-type scale, and had evidence of patient involvement in development. Despite their coverage, when these instruments were evaluated in light of regulatory expectations, several issues jeopardized their potential qualification for substantiation of a labeling claim.

conclusionsNo existing PRO instruments that measured all seven symptoms adhered to the regulatory principles necessary to support product labeling. As such, the development of a new FD symptom PRO instrument is supported.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresDyspepsiaHumansQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID27020447
PMCPMC5021747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.