SynthesisJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025
Capturing Real-World Rare Disease Patient Journeys: Are Current Methodologies Sufficient for Informed Healthcare Decisions?
Synthesis in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleDespite growing emphasis among healthcare decision-makers on patient perspectives and real-world outcomes to inform care and access decisions, understanding of patient journey experiences in rare diseases remains limited due to data collection and evaluation challenges. AIMS AND
objectivesThis systematic literature review (SLR) assessed study designs, methodologies, and outcomes reported in real-world investigations of rare disease patient journeys.
methodsSearches in PubMed and Google Scholar targeted English-language publications and congress proceedings from 1 January 2014, to 30 April 2024, including rare disease patients, caregivers, or healthcare providers. Keywords included 'Journey', 'Path', or 'Odyssey'. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and abstracted data. Descriptive analyses and quality assessments were conducted.
resultsThirty-one studies met inclusion criteria, with 296,548 participants spanning over 600 rare diseases. Most studies used prospective observational (61%) and cross-sectional (84%) designs and were conducted in Europe (45%). Interviews (39%) and surveys (29%) were common methodologies. Patients (87%) were the primary research focus, compared to caregivers (32%) or providers (10%). The most studied journey stages were 'Pre-diagnosis/Screening' (97%) and 'Diagnosis' (84%), while 'Disease Awareness' (16%) and 'Treatment Adherence' (6%) were less common. Across 164 outcomes reported, frequent outcomes included 'Healthcare Resource Utilization' (94%), 'Symptoms' (74%), and 'Time-to-Diagnosis' (71%). Fewer studies reported 'Costs' (19%), 'Caregiver/Family Burden' (16%), and 'Productivity' (13%). Time-to-diagnosis averaged 11.8 years and a median of 6.1 years. All but one study (97%) was rated low or very low quality due to observational designs.
conclusionMost rare disease patient journey evidence focuses on 'Pre-diagnosis/Screening' and 'Diagnosis' stages using qualitative methods and surveys. While symptoms, time-to-diagnosis, and resource utilization were commonly reported, evidence gaps included treatment adherence, caregiver burden and productivity. Longitudinal assessments to collect real-world care and treatment burden outcomes, including caregiver perspectives, can enhance both clinician and policy decision-making for individuals living with rare diseases.
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.