Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30167315›Full record

ArticleLupus science & medicine2018

Patient-reported outcome measures for use in clinical trials of SLE: a review.

Zara Izadi, Julie Gandrup, Patricia P Katz, Jinoos Yazdany

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. [Assessment tools for systemic lupus erythematosus].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Patients' Experiences WithOpen forum infectious diseases · 2022
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zara IzadiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1867-0905
Julie GandrupDivision of Rheumatology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Patricia P KatzDivision of Rheumatology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Jinoos YazdanyDivision of Rheumatology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.

Funding

RESOURCE-BASED CENTER FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF PRECISION MEDICINE IN RHEUMATOLOGYP30AR070155 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Mary C Nakamura · 2016 to 2026
$8.2M
NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR070155
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inclusion of patient-reported outcomes is important in SLE clinical trials as they allow capture of the benefits of a proposed intervention in areas deemed pertinent by patients. We aimed to compare the measurement properties of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures used in adults with SLE and to evaluate their responsiveness to interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A systematic review was undertaken using full original papers in English identified from three databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed. Studies describing the validation of HRQoL measures in English-speaking adult patients with SLE and SLE drug RCTs that used an HRQoL measure were retrieved. Twenty-five validation papers and 26 RCTs were included in the indepth review evaluating the measurement properties of 4 generic (Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF36), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item-bank, EuroQol-5D, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue) and 3 disease-specific (Lupus Quality of Life (LupusQoL), Lupus Patient Reported Outcomes, Lupus Impact Tracker (LIT)) instruments. All measures had good convergent and discriminant validity. PROMIS provided the strongest evidence for known-group validity and reliability among generic instruments; however, data on its responsiveness have not been published. Across measures, standardised response means were generally indicative of poor-moderate sensitivity to longitudinal change. In RCTs, clinically important improvements were reported in SF36 scores from baseline; however, between-arm differences were frequently non-significant and non-important. SF36, PROMIS, LupusQoL and LIT had the strongest evidence for acceptable measurement properties, but few measures aside from the SF36 have been incorporated into clinical trials. This review highlights the importance of incorporating a broader range of SLE-specific HRQoL measures in RCTs and warrants further research that focuses on longitudinal responsiveness of newer instruments.

Indexed as

outcomes researchpatient perspectivepatient-reported outcomesquality of lifesystemic lupus erythematosus

Identifiers

PMID30167315
PMCPMC6109821

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.