ArticlePloS one2018
A quantitative method for measuring the relationship between an objective endpoint and patient reported outcome measures.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) become increasingly important for assessing the effectiveness of a drug or medical device. In order for a PROM to be claimed in labeling, the PROM has to be valid, reliable and able to detect a change if the targeted disease status changes. One approach to assess the quality of a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) is to investigate the association between the PROM and an objective clinical endpoint measuring the status of a disease/condition. However, methods assessing the association between continuous and discrete variables are limited, especially for correlated measurements. In this paper, we propose a method to assess such association with any type of samples with or without correlation. The method involves estimating the probability revealing the status of a subject's disease/condition (called truth thereafter) through the subject's reported outcomes. The probability is a conditional probability revealing truth given the relative location of the subject's objective outcome compared to the subject-specific latent threshold in the objective endpoint. A consistent estimator for the probability is derived. The operating characteristics of the consistent estimator are illustrated using simulation. Our method is applied to hypothetical clinical trial data generated for an ophthalmic device as an illustration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.