Enabling patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials, exemplified by cardiovascular trials.

Journal Article (Letter)

OBJECTIVES: There has been limited success in achieving integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials. We describe how stakeholders envision a solution to this challenge. METHODS: Stakeholders from academia, industry, non-profits, insurers, clinicians, and the Food and Drug Administration convened at a Think Tank meeting funded by the Duke Clinical Research Institute to discuss the challenges of incorporating PROs into clinical trials and how to address those challenges. Using examples from cardiovascular trials, this article describes a potential path forward with a focus on applications in the United States. RESULTS: Think Tank members identified one key challenge: a common understanding of the level of evidence that is necessary to support patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in trials. Think Tank participants discussed the possibility of creating general evidentiary standards depending upon contextual factors, but such guidelines could not be feasibly developed because many contextual factors are at play. The attendees posited that a more informative approach to PROM evidentiary standards would be to develop validity arguments akin to courtroom briefs, which would emphasize a compelling rationale (interpretation/use argument) to support a PROM within a specific context. Participants envisioned a future in which validity arguments would be publicly available via a repository, which would be indexed by contextual factors, clinical populations, and types of claims. CONCLUSIONS: A publicly available repository would help stakeholders better understand what a community believes constitutes compelling support for a specific PROM in a trial. Our proposed strategy is expected to facilitate the incorporation of PROMs into cardiovascular clinical trials and trials in general.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Coles, TM; Hernandez, AF; Reeve, BB; Cook, K; Edwards, MC; Boutin, M; Bush, E; Degboe, A; Roessig, L; Rudolph, A; McNulty, P; Patel, N; Kay-Mugford, T; Vernon, M; Woloschak, M; Buchele, G; Spertus, JA; Roe, MT; Bury, D; Weinfurt, K

Published Date

  • June 13, 2021

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 19 / 1

Start / End Page

  • 164 -

PubMed ID

  • 34120618

Pubmed Central ID

  • PMC8201736

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1477-7525

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1186/s12955-021-01800-1


  • eng

Conference Location

  • England