ReviewJournal of patient-reported outcomes2022
Systematic review of guidance for the collection and use of patient-reported outcomes in real-world evidence generation to support regulation, reimbursement and health policy.
Review in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Real-world effectiveness and safety of advanced therapies for the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis: Evidence from a systematic literature review.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2024Pooled it
- The patient reported intraocular lens questionnaire (PR-ILQ): content validity, psychometric performance, and use in a regulated clinical trial to evaluate safety and effectiveness outcomes.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Trial
- Patient-Reported Outcomes Used for Regulatory Approval of Medicines Indicated for the Treatment of Dermatological Diseases Authorized in the European Union Between 1998 and 2024.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Long-term impact of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor on small and large airways in people with cystic fibrosis aged ≥6 years: 24-month real-world evidence from the German Cystic Fibrosis Registry.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Incorporating patients' input in the development and validation of patient-reported outcome measures in oncology: a comprehensive scoping review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Review
- Patient Preferences for Technology-Assisted Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement of Mental Health Symptoms Among Veterans: Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Editorial: Increasing importance of patients-generated real world data for healthcare policy decisions about medicinal products: volume III.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Unlocking the Value of Patient Self-Monitoring Technologies: A Multi-Country Framework to Calibrate Payer and HTA Coverage and Reimbursement Considerations with Innovation.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2026Article
- Real-World Data Included in Post-authorisation Measures: A Case Study of Approved Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products in the European Union between 2013 and 2024.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2025Article
- Article
- Benefits and Limitations of Real-World Patient-Reported Toxicity Symptom Monitoring for Guidelines and Care, as Perceived by Patients, Clinicians, and Guideline Developers.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Use of real-world data as pivotal evidence in veterinary regulatory applications.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Conceptual review of outcome metrics and measures used in clinical evaluation of artificial intelligence in radiology.La Radiologia medica · 2024Review
- Evaluating the Population-Based Usage and Benefit of Digitally Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences in Patients With Chronic Diseases: The PROMchronic Study Protocol.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Survey on Value Elements Provided by Artificial Intelligence and Their Eligibility for Insurance Coverage With an Emphasis on Patient-Centered Outcomes.Korean journal of radiology · 2024Article
- How to select and understand guidelines for patient-reported outcomes: a scoping review of existing guidance.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Young or Old Age and Non-White Race Are Associated With Poor Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Response Compliance After Orthopaedic Surgery.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Review
- Impact of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor on lung function, nutritional status, pulmonary exacerbation frequency and sweat chloride in people with cystic fibrosis: real-world evidence from the German CF Registry.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2023Article
- Data-Driven Personalized Care in Lung Cancer: Scoping Review and Clinical Recommendations on Performance Status and Activity Level of Patients With Lung Cancer Using Wearable Devices.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReal-world evidence (RWE) plays an increasingly important role within global regulatory and reimbursement processes. RWE generation can be enhanced by the collection and use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which can provide valuable information on the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of health interventions from the patient perspective. This systematic review aims to examine and summarise the available PRO-specific recommendations and guidance for RWE generation. METHODS AND
findingsMedical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database, and websites of selected organisations were systematically searched to identify relevant publications. 1,249 articles were screened of which 7 papers met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The included publications provided PRO-specific recommendations to facilitate the use of PROs for RWE generation and these were extracted and grouped into eight major categories. These included: (1) instrument selection, (2) participation and engagement, (3) burden to health care professionals and patients, (4) stakeholder collaboration, (5) education and training, (6) PRO implementation process, (7) data collection and management, and (8) data analysis and presentation of results. The main limitation of the study was the potential exclusion of relevant publications, due to poor indexing of the databases and websites searched.
conclusionsPROs may provide valuable and crucial patient input in RWE generation. Whilst valuable insights can be gained from guidance for use of PROs in clinical care, there is a lack of international guidance specific to RWE generation in the context of use for regulatory decision-making, reimbursement, and health policy. Clear and appropriate evidence-based guidance is required to maximise the potential benefits of implementing PROs for RWE generation. Unique aspects between PRO guidance for clinical care and other purposes should be differentiated. The needs of various stakeholder groups (including patients, health care professionals, regulators, payers, and industry) should be considered when developing future guidelines.
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.