Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40056370›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2025

An Evaluation of Time Spent Completing Electronically Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials.

Lucy Andersen, Michael Williams, Sheryl Pease, Harman Dhatt, Patricia Delong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Determining the quality of life-aged care consumer threshold to identify good quality of life in older adults in long-term care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Lucy AndersenJohnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ, USA.
Michael WilliamsJohnson & Johnson Research and Development, Springhouse, PA, USA.
Sheryl PeaseJohnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ, USA.
Harman DhattJohnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ, USA.
Patricia DelongJohnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ, USA. pdelong3@its.jnj.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important measures of efficacy in the context of clinical trials but are sometimes identified as time and resource intensive to study participants and site personnel. The objective of this research was to evaluate the amount of time that participants spend completing PROs via an electronic device in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials across several disease areas.

methodsThe electronic Clinical Outcome Assessment (eCOA) data were obtained from Johnson & Johnson clinical trials across various disease areas from 2016 to 2023. Data were acquired from internal and external sources including clinical trial sites and eCOA partners. In total, 82 trials were analyzed, containing data from 33,633 unique participants, and 1,083,994 measurements of completed electronic PRO instruments. After data cleaning, descriptive and multivariate analyses were performed. Electronic PRO completion time was examined in two ways: by time-per-item and time-per-instrument for each PRO.

resultsOn average, participants spend about 16 s per item and an average of 2 min to complete a PRO instrument electronically. The average time to complete PRO instruments varied significantly by disease area and most eCOA were completed on study site tablets (68%) or personal handheld devices (31%).

conclusionsOverall, patients spend an average of 16 s per item and 2 min per PRO instrument in clinical trial studies. PROs are a crucial component of clinical trial outcomes data and can be efficiently completed electronically by participants in clinical trials in a short amount of time.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicHumansTime FactorsClinical trialClinical trial participationDigital health technologyeCOAElectronic data collectionPatient reported outcome measures

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.