ReviewHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022
Patient-reported outcomes in vaccines research: relevance for decision-making.
Review in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Proposed Conceptual and Experience-Based Framework for Reaching an Optimal Vaccine Launch Strategy.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Introducing an Expanded Value Framework in Health Technology Assessment of Vaccines.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- Awareness of respiratory syncytial virus and other respiratory disease vaccines among healthcare professionals and their patients in Italy: Insights from a literature review and a web-based survey.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Review
- Reflections on the Optimal Use of eDiaries for Data Collection in Vaccine Clinical Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Insight and benefits from vaccine clinical trials with adaptive designs: a scoping review.Translational and clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Ensuring equity with pre-clinical planning for chlamydia vaccines.NPJ vaccines · 2023Review
- Impact of COVID-19 and effects of BNT162b2 on patient-reported outcomes: quality of life, symptoms, and work productivity among US adult outpatients.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development and demand for effective vaccines have witnessed an exponential growth over the last century. In the meantime, the vaccine market involves more knowledgeable stakeholders, with a shift in emphasis by regulatory agencies on understanding the patient perception and experience. The Food and Drug Administration's publication of the patient-reported outcomes (PRO) guidance has elevated the discipline of PROs and has resulted in a transition from clinician reports of patient outcomes to PROs. This review reports various research methods, which utilize PROs, including qualitative and quantitative research, clinical trials, and patient preference studies. With the advancement of electronic PRO data capture, additional advantages of PROs are being observed and utilized (e.g. as a trigger for clinical endpoints). We discuss uses and advantages of including PROs into the clinical trial program to improve efficiencies, clinical relevance and overall validity of the program in the vaccine field. (See Plain Language Summary).
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.