量化患者报告的结果措施以评估治疗效果的差异。

Sathish Muthu, Srujun Vadranapu
{"title":"量化患者报告的结果措施以评估治疗效果的差异。","authors":"Sathish Muthu, Srujun Vadranapu","doi":"10.5662/wjm.v15.i2.97078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the practice of healthcare, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and PRO measures (PROMs) are used as an attempt to observe the changes in complex clinical situations. They guide us in making decisions based on the evidence regarding patient care by recording the change in outcomes for a particular treatment to a given condition and finally to understand whether a patient will benefit from a particular treatment and to quantify the treatment effect. For any PROM to be usable in health care, we need it to be reliable, encapsulating the points of interest with the potential to detect any real change. Using structured outcome measures routinely in clinical practice helps the physician to understand the functional limitation of a patient that would otherwise not be clear in an office interview, and this allows the physician and patient to have a meaningful conversation as well as a customized plan for each patient. Having mentioned the rationale and the benefits of PROMs, understanding the quantification process is crucial before embarking on management decisions. A better interpretation of change needs to identify the treatment effect based on clinical relevance for a given condition. There are a multiple set of measurement indices to serve this effect and most of them are used interchangeably without clear demarcation on their differences. This article details the various quantification metrics used to evaluate the treatment effect using PROMs, their limitations and the scope of usage and implementation in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":94271,"journal":{"name":"World journal of methodology","volume":"15 2","pages":"97078"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11612729/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variations in quantifying patient reported outcome measures to estimate treatment effect.\",\"authors\":\"Sathish Muthu, Srujun Vadranapu\",\"doi\":\"10.5662/wjm.v15.i2.97078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the practice of healthcare, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and PRO measures (PROMs) are used as an attempt to observe the changes in complex clinical situations. They guide us in making decisions based on the evidence regarding patient care by recording the change in outcomes for a particular treatment to a given condition and finally to understand whether a patient will benefit from a particular treatment and to quantify the treatment effect. For any PROM to be usable in health care, we need it to be reliable, encapsulating the points of interest with the potential to detect any real change. Using structured outcome measures routinely in clinical practice helps the physician to understand the functional limitation of a patient that would otherwise not be clear in an office interview, and this allows the physician and patient to have a meaningful conversation as well as a customized plan for each patient. Having mentioned the rationale and the benefits of PROMs, understanding the quantification process is crucial before embarking on management decisions. A better interpretation of change needs to identify the treatment effect based on clinical relevance for a given condition. There are a multiple set of measurement indices to serve this effect and most of them are used interchangeably without clear demarcation on their differences. This article details the various quantification metrics used to evaluate the treatment effect using PROMs, their limitations and the scope of usage and implementation in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World journal of methodology\",\"volume\":\"15 2\",\"pages\":\"97078\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11612729/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World journal of methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v15.i2.97078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v15.i2.97078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在医疗保健实践中,患者报告结果(PRO)和PRO测量(PROMs)被用来观察复杂临床情况下的变化。它们指导我们根据病人护理的证据做出决定,通过记录特定条件下特定治疗结果的变化,最终了解病人是否会从特定治疗中受益,并量化治疗效果。对于任何可用于医疗保健的PROM,我们需要它是可靠的,封装感兴趣的点,并具有检测任何实际变化的潜力。在临床实践中,常规使用结构化的结果测量有助于医生了解患者的功能限制,否则在办公室面谈中无法清楚了解,这使得医生和患者能够进行有意义的对话,并为每位患者制定定制计划。在提到prom的基本原理和好处之后,在开始管理决策之前,理解量化过程是至关重要的。对改变的更好解释需要根据特定情况的临床相关性确定治疗效果。有多种测量指标可以达到这种效果,其中大多数可以互换使用,没有明确的界限。本文详细介绍了用于评价PROMs治疗效果的各种量化指标,它们的局限性以及在临床实践中的使用和实施范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Variations in quantifying patient reported outcome measures to estimate treatment effect.

In the practice of healthcare, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and PRO measures (PROMs) are used as an attempt to observe the changes in complex clinical situations. They guide us in making decisions based on the evidence regarding patient care by recording the change in outcomes for a particular treatment to a given condition and finally to understand whether a patient will benefit from a particular treatment and to quantify the treatment effect. For any PROM to be usable in health care, we need it to be reliable, encapsulating the points of interest with the potential to detect any real change. Using structured outcome measures routinely in clinical practice helps the physician to understand the functional limitation of a patient that would otherwise not be clear in an office interview, and this allows the physician and patient to have a meaningful conversation as well as a customized plan for each patient. Having mentioned the rationale and the benefits of PROMs, understanding the quantification process is crucial before embarking on management decisions. A better interpretation of change needs to identify the treatment effect based on clinical relevance for a given condition. There are a multiple set of measurement indices to serve this effect and most of them are used interchangeably without clear demarcation on their differences. This article details the various quantification metrics used to evaluate the treatment effect using PROMs, their limitations and the scope of usage and implementation in clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信