Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Presenting comparative study PRO results to clinicians and researchers: beyond the eye of the beholder.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Brundage, M; Blackford, A; Tolbert, E; Smith, K; Bantug, E; Snyder, C ...
Published in: Qual Life Res
January 2018

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) results from clinical trials can inform clinical care, but PRO interpretation is challenging. We evaluated the interpretation accuracy and perceived clarity of various strategies for displaying clinical trial PRO findings. METHODS: We conducted an e-survey of oncology clinicians and PRO researchers (supplemented by one-on-one clinician interviews) that randomized respondents to view one of the three line-graph formats (average scores over time for two treatments on four domains): (1) higher scores consistently indicating "better" patient status; (2) higher scores indicating "more" of what was being measured (better for function, worse for symptoms); or (3) normed scores. Two formats displayed proportions changed (pie/bar charts). Multivariate modeling was used to analyze interpretation accuracy and clarity ratings. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-three clinicians and 248 researchers responded; ten clinicians were interviewed. Line graphs with "better" directionality were more likely to be interpreted accurately than "normed" line graphs (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.01-2.38; p = 0.04). No significant differences were found between "better" and "more" formats. "Better" formatted graphs were also more likely to be rated "very clear" versus "normed" formatted graphs (OR 1.91; 95% CI 1.44-2.54; p < 0.001). For proportions changed, respondents were less likely to make an interpretation error with pie versus bar charts (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.2-0.6; p < 0.001); clarity ratings did not differ between formats. Qualitative findings informed the interpretation of the survey findings. CONCLUSIONS: Graphic formats for presenting PRO data differ in how accurately they are interpreted and how clear they are perceived to be. These findings will inform the development of best practices for optimally reporting PRO findings.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Qual Life Res

DOI

EISSN

1573-2649

Publication Date

January 2018

Volume

27

Issue

1

Start / End Page

75 / 90

Location

Netherlands

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Research Personnel
  • Quality of Life
  • Patient Reported Outcome Measures
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
  • Health Policy & Services
  • Female
  • Education, Distance
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Brundage, M., Blackford, A., Tolbert, E., Smith, K., Bantug, E., Snyder, C., & PRO Data Presentation Stakeholder Advisory Board (various names and locations), . (2018). Presenting comparative study PRO results to clinicians and researchers: beyond the eye of the beholder. Qual Life Res, 27(1), 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1710-6
Brundage, Michael, Amanda Blackford, Elliott Tolbert, Katherine Smith, Elissa Bantug, Claire Snyder, and Claire PRO Data Presentation Stakeholder Advisory Board (various names and locations). “Presenting comparative study PRO results to clinicians and researchers: beyond the eye of the beholder.Qual Life Res 27, no. 1 (January 2018): 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1710-6.
Brundage M, Blackford A, Tolbert E, Smith K, Bantug E, Snyder C, et al. Presenting comparative study PRO results to clinicians and researchers: beyond the eye of the beholder. Qual Life Res. 2018 Jan;27(1):75–90.
Brundage, Michael, et al. “Presenting comparative study PRO results to clinicians and researchers: beyond the eye of the beholder.Qual Life Res, vol. 27, no. 1, Jan. 2018, pp. 75–90. Pubmed, doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1710-6.
Brundage M, Blackford A, Tolbert E, Smith K, Bantug E, Snyder C, PRO Data Presentation Stakeholder Advisory Board (various names and locations). Presenting comparative study PRO results to clinicians and researchers: beyond the eye of the beholder. Qual Life Res. 2018 Jan;27(1):75–90.
Journal cover image

Published In

Qual Life Res

DOI

EISSN

1573-2649

Publication Date

January 2018

Volume

27

Issue

1

Start / End Page

75 / 90

Location

Netherlands

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Research Personnel
  • Quality of Life
  • Patient Reported Outcome Measures
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
  • Health Policy & Services
  • Female
  • Education, Distance