ReviewBMJ open2025
Pragmatic paradigm for patient-reported outcome measure selection in lymphoma clinical trials: a rapid review study.
Review in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLymphoma is a haematologic malignancy affecting cells of the immune system. With numerous treatment options available, clinicians and patients frequently face difficulty in selecting the most appropriate therapy. Patient-reported Outcome (PRO) offers valuable patients' insight that may support treatment differentiation. A PRO measure (PROM) is a questionnaire or survey measuring a PRO. Despite many efforts to guide the selection of PROMs in clinical trials, choosing the appropriate ones remains a challenge. This study aims to develop a pragmatic paradigm for selecting PROMs in clinical trials involving adult patients with lymphoma through the collaboration and communication between clinical investigators involved in trials and Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR) scientists specialised in research methodologies.
designA rapid review was conducted to identify existing PROMs for adult patients with lymphoma in clinical trials and guidelines supporting PROM selection. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Google Scholar and websites for regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies in eight countries of interest were searched from 2009 to July 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Publications with PROMs were identified for adult patients in lymphoma trials. The most relevant guidelines supporting the development of the pragmatic paradigm were selected. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The initial search and data extraction were conducted by one author. All authors participated in an in-depth review process.
resultsWe categorise 31 applicable PROMs for lymphoma into four distinct groups, streamlining the PROM selection process to facilitate effective communication among clinical investigators, HEOR scientists, patients and others. Additionally, a five-step pragmatic paradigm is developed for identifying appropriate PROM(s).
conclusionsThe pragmatic paradigm presents a practical approach for selecting PROM(s) in lymphoma clinical trials. An appropriate PROM should conceptually align with the treatment goals and be acceptable to regulatory and HTA bodies. Thus, lymphoma clinical trials can generate more patient-focused data, contributing to improving patients' quality of life and advancing lymphoma care.
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.