10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      ‘Give Us The Tools!’: development of knowledge transfer tools to support the involvement of patient partners in the development of clinical trial protocols with patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in accordance with SPIRIT-PRO Extension

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          (a) To adapt the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT)-patient-reported outcome (PRO) Extension guidance to a user-friendly format for patient partners and (b) to codesign a web-based tool to support the dissemination and uptake of the SPIRIT-PRO Extension by patient partners.

          Design

          A 1-day patient and public involvement session.

          Participants

          Seven patient partners.

          Methods

          A patient partner produced an initial lay summary of the SPIRIT-PRO guideline and a glossary. We held a 1-day PPI session in November 2019 at the University of Birmingham. Five patient partners discussed the draft lay summary, agreed on the final wording, codesigned and agreed the final content for both tools. Two additional patient partners were involved in writing the manuscript. The study compiled with INVOLVE guidelines and was reported according to the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 checklist.

          Results

          Two user-friendly tools were developed to help patients and members of the public be involved in the codesign of clinical trials collecting PROs. The first tool presents a lay version of the SPIRIT-PRO Extension guidance. The second depicts the most relevant points, identified by the patient partners, of the guidance through an interactive flow diagram.

          Conclusions

          These tools have the potential to support the involvement of patient partners in making informed contributions to the development of PRO aspects of clinical trial protocols, in accordance with the SPIRIT-PRO Extension guidelines. The involvement of patient partners ensured the tools focused on issues most relevant to them.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes.

          Our model proposes a taxonomy or classification scheme for different measures of health outcome. We divide these outcomes into five levels: biological and physiological factors, symptoms, functioning, general health perceptions, and overall quality of life. In addition to classifying these outcome measures, we propose specific causal relationships between them that link traditional clinical variables to measures of HRQL. As one moves from left to right in the model, one moves outward from the cell to the individual to the interaction of the individual as a member of society. The concepts at each level are increasingly integrated and increasingly difficult to define and measure. AT each level, there are an increasing number of inputs that cannot be controlled by clinicians or the health care system as it is traditionally defined.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research

            GRIPP2 (short form and long form) is the first international guidance for reporting of patient and public involvement in health and social care research. This paper describes the development of the GRIPP2 reporting checklists, which aim to improve the quality, transparency, and consistency of the international patient and public involvement (PPI) evidence base, to ensure that PPI practice is based on the best evidence
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols

              Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials can provide valuable evidence to inform shared decision making, labeling claims, clinical guidelines, and health policy; however, the PRO content of clinical trial protocols is often suboptimal. The SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) statement was published in 2013 and aims to improve the completeness of trial protocols by providing evidence-based recommendations for the minimum set of items to be addressed, but it does not provide PRO-specific guidance.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2021
                30 June 2021
                : 11
                : 6
                : e046450
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentInstitute of Applied Health Research, Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research , University of Birmingham , Birmingham, UK
                [2 ]departmentStakeholder Group , BBMRI-ERIC , Graz, Austria
                [3 ]departmentCentral Clinical School , University of Sydney , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [4 ]departmentQOL Office , University of Sydney , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [5 ]departmentCentre for Patient Reported Outcomes , University of Birmingham , Birmingham, UK
                [6 ]departmentConsumer Forum , National Cancer Research Institute , London, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Professor Melanie Calvert; M.Calvert@ 123456bham.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1566-6804
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3708-9099
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1856-837X
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-046450
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046450
                8246365
                34193492
                4416c760-4cb4-4480-8e14-3b53f6e4b5fa
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 03 November 2020
                : 07 January 2021
                : 08 January 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: UCB Pharma;
                Categories
                Patient-Centred Medicine
                1506
                1722
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                protocols & guidelines,quality in health care,qualitative research
                Medicine
                protocols & guidelines, quality in health care, qualitative research

                Comments

                Comment on this article