ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
Development of a modular patient-reported outcome and experience measure on patient needs and benefits in CLL (PBI-CLL).
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundChronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is the most common form of leukaemia in adults in western countries. Asymptomatic patients are under clinical observation; when indication for treatment according to guidelines is met, treatment is initiated. When choosing from the numerous new treatment options, individual patient needs should be considered. To date, no instrument exists to capture these needs. METHODOLOGY: The ePROM was developed based on the Patient Benefit Index (PBI) methodology which captures the importance of treatment goals as well as the achievement of these goals. The development considered the COSMIN guidelines and included semi-structured interviews with 28 patients with CLL and free-text questionnaires (n = 15). Data were analysed via qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz. The PBI-CLL was finalised through an expert consensus and cognitive debriefing interviews with 14 patients.
resultsThe content elicitation showed that the individual treatment burden and treatment goals in CLL vary considerably between patients, underlining the heterogeneity of this patient group. Patients reported disease burden in their physical constitution as well as mental burden. Many patients' main goal was to live normally and with the lowest impact possible through the CLL and its therapy. The PBI-CLL developed based on these data consists of three modules: therapy outcomes, process quality and relative treatment preferences. The cognitive debriefing interviews showed that patients find the instrument relevant, comprehensive, and comprehensible.
conclusionsThe PBI-CLL is the first instrument to assess patients' needs and benefits in CLL. The heterogeneity we found in patient needs and preferences underlines the importance of a modular instrument which measures treatment goals and benefits in a standardized way. The PBI-CLL shall support both patient-centred therapeutic decision making and treatment evaluation in clinical practice, as well as patient-centred benefit assessment in clinical and health care research. It should therefore be tested for its psychometric properties in a subsequent validation study.
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.