Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35094586›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2022

The PROTEUS-Trials Consortium: Optimizing the use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials.

Claire Snyder, Norah Crossnohere, Madeleine King, Bryce B Reeve, Andrew Bottomley, Melanie Calvert, Elissa Thorner, Albert W Wu, Michael Brundage, PROTEUS-Trials Consortium

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Physiotherapist and nurse perspectives on the acceptability and timing of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice: Balancing standardisation and flexibility.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Introduction to "PRISMA-COSMIN for outcome measurement instruments 2024".Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. How to make PROMs work: qualitative insights from leaders at United States hospitals with successful PROMs programs.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    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

10 authors.

Claire SnyderJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8952-4561
Norah CrossnohereCollege of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Madeleine KingSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Bryce B ReeveSchool of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Andrew BottomleyEuropean Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Melanie CalvertBirmingham Health Partners Centre for Regulatory Science and Innovation, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Elissa ThornerJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Albert W WuJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Michael BrundageQueen's Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
PROTEUS-Trials Consortium

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe assessment of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials has enormous potential to promote patient-centred care, but for this potential to be realized, the patient-reported outcomes must be captured effectively and communicated clearly. Over the past decade, methodologic tools have been developed to inform the design, analysis, reporting, and interpretation of patient-reported outcome data from clinical trials. We formed the PROTEUS-Trials Consortium (Patient-Reported Outcomes Tools: Engaging Users and Stakeholders) to disseminate and implement these methodologic tools.

methodsPROTEUS-Trials are engaging with patient, clinician, research, and regulatory stakeholders from 27 organizations in the United States, Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Europe to develop both organization-specific and cross-cutting strategies for implementing and disseminating the methodologic tools. Guided by the Knowledge-to-Action framework, we conducted consortium-wide webinars and meetings, as well as individual calls with participating organizations, to develop a workplan, which we are currently executing.

resultsSix methodologic tools serve as the foundation for PROTEUS-Trials dissemination and implementation efforts: the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-patient-reported outcome extension for writing protocols with patient-reported outcomes, the International Society for Quality of Life Research Minimum Standards for selecting a patient-reported outcome measure, Setting International Standards in Analysing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data Consortium recommendations for patient-reported outcome data analysis, the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials-patient-reported outcome extension for reporting clinical trials with patient-reported outcomes, recommendations for the graphic display of patient-reported outcome data, and a Clinician's Checklist for reading and using an article about patient-reported outcomes. The PROTEUS-Trials website (www.TheProteusConsortium.org) serves as a central repository for the methodologic tools and associated resources. To date, we have developed (1) a roadmap to visually display where each of the six methodologic tools applies along the clinical trial trajectory, (2) web tutorials that provide guidance on the methodologic tools at different levels of detail, (3) checklists to provide brief summaries of each tool's recommendations, (4) a handbook to provide a self-guided approach to learning about the tools and recommendations, and (5) publications that address key topics related to patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials. We are also conducting organization-specific activities, including meetings, presentations, workshops, and webinars to publicize the existence of the methodologic tools and the PROTEUS-Trials resources. Work to develop communications strategies to ensure that PROTEUS-Trials reach key audiences with relevant information about patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and PROTEUS-Trials is ongoing. DISCUSSION: The PROTEUS-Trials Consortium aims to help researchers generate patient-reported outcome data from clinical trials to (1) enable investigators, regulators, and policy-makers to take the patient perspective into account when conducting research and making decisions; (2) help patients understand treatment options and make treatment decisions; and (3) inform clinicians' discussions with patients regarding treatment options. In these ways, the PROTEUS Consortium promotes patient-centred research and care.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeClinical Trials as TopicDecision MakingHumansProteusResearch DesignUnited Statesclinical trialsdata visualizationmeasure selectionPatient-reported outcomesprotocolsreporting methods

Identifiers

PMID35094586
PMCPMC9203669

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.