Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39659950›Full record

ReviewDrug design, development and therapy2024

From the Formation of Conceptual Framework to Regulatory Decision-Making: Considerations for the Developments of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments.

Kai Cao, Xu-Yuan Quan, Yan Hou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drug design, development and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Kai CaoDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, 100191, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-0185-887X
Xu-Yuan QuanDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, 100191, People's Republic of China.
Yan HouDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, 100191, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, patient-focused drug development (PFDD) has received widespread attention as a new paradigm in clinical trials. The PFDD emphasizes patients are partners in research projects, where patients can participate in research design, implementation, and outcome measurement, rather than just providing data. PFDD has shown great value in the research and development of pharmaceutical products, such as in accelerating the process of patient enrollment and improving the success rate of drug approval. Many countries and regions, including the United States, China, and Europe, have issued relevant regulatory policies and guidelines related to PFDD, covering study design, implementation, and risk-benefit assessment. The core of PFDD implementation is clinical outcome assessment (COA), of which patient-reported outcome (PRO) is most common. As far as the US Food and Drug Administration is concerned, there are numerous COA tools waiting for qualification, but currently all qualified are PROs. This review focuses on PRO and explores the key elements of PRO instruments' development, application, and inclusion in regulatory decision-making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresDrug ApprovalDrug DevelopmentHumansUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administrationclinical trialdevelopmentdrugpatient-focusedpatient-reported outcome

Identifiers

PMID39659950
PMCPMC11630697

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.