Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28913785›Full record

ReviewNeurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics2017

Evolution of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Their Role in Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Trials.

Cindy J Nowinski, Deborah M Miller, David Cella

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Improving the efficiency of clinical trials in multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Neuroimaging Correlates of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Multiple Sclerosis.Degenerative neurological and neuromuscular disease · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Cindy J NowinskiNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. c-nowinski@northwestern.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5608-909X
Deborah M MillerMellen Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
David CellaNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.

Funding

The National Person-Centered Assessment Resource (PCAR)U2CCA186878 · NCI · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI GERSHON, RICHARD · 2014 to 2018
$11.9M
NCI NIH HHS U2C CA186878NINDS NIH HHS HHSN271201200036C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are playing an increasing role in multiple sclerosis (MS) research and practice, and are essential for understanding the effects that MS and MS treatments have on patients' lives. PROs are captured directly from patients and include symptoms, function, health status, and health-related quality of life. In this article, we review different categories (e.g., generic, targeted, preference-based) of PRO measures and considerations in selecting a measure. The PROs included in MS clinical research have evolved over time, as have the measures used to assess them. We describe findings from recent MS clinical trials that included PROs when evaluating Food and Drug Administration-approved disease-modifying therapies (e.g., daclizumab, teriflunomide). Variation in the measures used in these trials makes it difficult to draw any conclusions from the data. We therefore suggest a standardized approach to PRO assessment in MS research and describe 2 generic, National Institutes of Health-supported measurement systems [Neuro-QoL and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)] that would facilitate such an approach. The use of PROs in MS care and research is expanding beyond clinical trials, as is demonstrated by examples from comparative effectiveness and other patient-centered research. The importance of PRO assessment is expected to continue to grow in the future.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresClinical Trials as TopicEndpoint DeterminationHumansMultiple SclerosisQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeClinical trialsHealth-related quality of lifeMultiple sclerosisPatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID28913785
PMCPMC5722775

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.