Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Systematic review of the use of translated patient-reported outcome measures in cancer trials.
Slade, A L; Retzer, A; Ahmed, K; Kyte, D; Keeley, T; Armes, J; Brown, J M; Calman, L; Gavin, A; Glaser, A W; Greenfield, D M; Lanceley, A; Taylor, R M; Velikova, G; Turner, G; Calvert, M J.
Afiliación
  • Slade AL; Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. a.l.slade@bham.ac.uk.
  • Retzer A; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. a.l.slade@bham.ac.uk.
  • Ahmed K; National Institute for Health Research Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, UK. a.l.slade@bham.ac.uk.
  • Kyte D; Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
  • Keeley T; Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
  • Armes J; Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
  • Brown JM; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
  • Calman L; National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Psychosocial Oncology and Survivorship Clinical Studies Group subgroup: Understanding and measuring the consequences of cancer and its treatment, London, UK.
  • Gavin A; Patient Centred Outcomes, GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK.
  • Glaser AW; National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Psychosocial Oncology and Survivorship Clinical Studies Group subgroup: Understanding and measuring the consequences of cancer and its treatment, London, UK.
  • Greenfield DM; School of Health Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
  • Lanceley A; NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Kent Surrey & Sussex University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
  • Taylor RM; Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  • Velikova G; National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Psychosocial Oncology and Survivorship Clinical Studies Group subgroup: Understanding and measuring the consequences of cancer and its treatment, London, UK.
  • Turner G; Macmillan Survivorship Research Group, Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Highfield Campus, Southampton, UK.
  • Calvert MJ; National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Psychosocial Oncology and Survivorship Clinical Studies Group subgroup: Understanding and measuring the consequences of cancer and its treatment, London, UK.
Trials ; 22(1): 306, 2021 Apr 26.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33902699
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in clinical trials to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of interventions. Inclusion of participants from different ethnic backgrounds is essential for generalisability of cancer trial results. PRO data collection should include appropriately translated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to minimise missing data and sample attrition.

METHODS:

Protocols and/or publications from cancer clinical trials using a PRO endpoint and registered on the National Institute for Health Research Portfolio were systematically reviewed for information on recruitment, inclusion of ethnicity data, and use of appropriately translated PROMs. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders to explore barriers and facilitators for optimal PRO trial design, diverse recruitment and reporting, and use of appropriately translated PROMs.

RESULTS:

Eighty-four trials met the inclusion criteria, only 14 (17%) (n = 4754) reported ethnic group data, and ethnic group recruitment was low, 611 (13%). Although 8 (57%) studies were multi-centred and multi-national, none reported using translated PROMs, although available for 7 (88%) of the studies. Interviews with 44 international stakeholders identified a number of perceived barriers to ethnically diverse recruitment including diverse participant engagement, relevance of ethnicity to research question, prominence of PROs, and need to minimise investigator burden. Stakeholders had differing opinions on the use of translated PROMs, the impact of trial designs, and recruitment strategies on diverse recruitment. Facilitators of inclusive research were described and examples of good practice identified.

CONCLUSIONS:

Greater transparency is required when PROs are used as primary or secondary outcomes in clinical trials. Protocols and publications should demonstrate that recruitment was accessible to diverse populations and facilitated by trial design, recruitment strategies, and appropriate PROM usage. The use of translated PROMs should be made explicit when used in cancer clinical trials.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente / Neoplasias Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Trials Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente / Neoplasias Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Trials Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article