Understanding Patient Reported Outcomes and Their Importance
Author Information
Author(s): Revicki Dennis A, Cella David, Hays Ron D, Sloan Jeff A, Lenderking William R, Aaronson Neil K
Primary Institution: Center for Health Outcomes Research, United Biosource Corporation
Hypothesis
How can we effectively determine the responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient-reported outcomes?
Conclusion
Patient-reported outcomes must be validated for responsiveness and minimal important differences to be useful in clinical trials.
Supporting Evidence
- Patient reported outcomes provide the patient's perspective on treatment effectiveness.
- The MID is defined as the smallest change in a PRO measure perceived as beneficial by patients.
- Responsiveness and MID vary by population and context.
Takeaway
This study talks about how important it is to understand what patients think about their treatment and how to measure if their health is getting better or worse.
Methodology
The study discusses various methods for determining the responsiveness and minimal important differences of patient-reported outcomes, including anchor-based and distribution-based approaches.
Limitations
The MID may vary by population and context, and no single MID will be valid for all study applications.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website