Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3/2010

01-09-2010 | Commentary

Electronic Patient Diaries and Questionnaires — ePRO Now Delivering on the Promise

Author: Professor Brian Tiplady

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Excerpt

The importance of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures, such as patient symptom diaries and quality of life (QOL) questionnaires, will hardly need emphasizing to the readers of this journal. PROs are increasingly being collected by electronic methods (ePRO). In this commentary, I consider several topics that arise with the use of ePRO, including different ePRO methods and their impact on data quality; how patients respond to using ePRO methods; and issues around validation of ePRO methods and equivalence to existing paper methods. I shall be dealing here with quantitative methods used as outcome measures in clinical research, not with qualitative methods, or the use of ePRO in routine clinical practice. …
Literature
1.
Stone AA, Broderick JE, Shiffman S, et al. Understanding recall of weekly pain from a momentary assessment perspective: absolute agreement, between- and within-person consistency, and judged change in weekly pain. Pain 2004; 107: 61–9PubMedCrossRef
2.
Stull DE, Leidy NK, Parasuraman B, et al. Optimal recall periods for patient-reported outcomes: challenges and potential solutions. Curr Med Res Opin 2009; 25: 929–42PubMedCrossRef
3.
Stone AA, Shiffman S, Schwartz JE, et al. Patient non-compliance with paper diaries. BMJ 2002; 324: 1193–4PubMedCrossRef
4.
US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures. Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2009
5.
McKenzie S, Paty J, Rosano M, et al. Trial power: how eDiary data can enhance the power and reduce the sample size in clinical trials. Appl Clin Trials 2004; 13: 54–68
6.
Ganser A, Raymond S, Pearson J. Data quality and power in clinical trials: a comparison of ePRO and paper in a randomized trial. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient reported data. Farnham: Gower. In Press
7.
Bernhard J, Cella DF, Coates AS, et al. Missing quality of life data in cancer clinical trials: serious problems and challenges. Stat Med 1998; 17: 517–32PubMedCrossRef
8.
Jerndal P, Garn T, Palmblad M, et al. The symptom relieving effect of omeprazole 20 mg b.i.d versus placebo in patients presenting with functional dyspepsia [Data collection report no. SH-OMD-0003-1]. Mölndal: Astra Hässle (now AstraZeneca), 1996 (Data on file)
9.
Tiplady B, Crompton GK, Dewar MH, et al. The use of electronic diaries in respiratory studies. Drug Inf J 1997; 31: 759–64CrossRef
10.
Palmblad M, Tiplady B. Electronic diaries and questionnaires: designing user interfaces that are easy for all patients to use. Qual Life Res 2004; 13: 1199–207PubMedCrossRef
11.
Nyholm D, Kowalski J, Aquilonius SM. Wireless real-time electronic data capture for self-assessment of motor function and quality of life in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 2004; 19: 446–51PubMedCrossRef
12.
Pierce J, Tiplady B. PDA or IVR based patient-reported outcomes systems: criteria to be considered when selecting an electronic PRO technology [white paper]. Pittsburgh (PA): invivodata®, 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​invivodata.​com/​epro-resources/​epro-technology-options/​ [Accessed 2010 Jan 21]
13.
Shields A, Gwaltney C, Tiplady B, et al. Grasping the FDA’s PRO guidance. Appl Clin Trials 2006; 15: 69–72
14.
Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, et al. Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report. Value Health 2009; 12: 419–29PubMedCrossRef
15.
Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health 2008; 11:322–33PubMedCrossRef
16.
Lundy JJ, Coons SJ. Testing the measurement equivalence of interactive voice response (IVR) and paper versions of the EQ-5D. Poster presented at the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 11th Annual European Congress; 2008 Nov 8–11; Athens
17.
Fries JF, Cella D, Rose M, et al. Progress in assessing physical function in arthritis: PROMIS short forms and computerized adaptive testing. J Rheumatol 2009; 36: 2061–6PubMedCrossRef
18.
Solomon KD, Donnenfeld ED, Raizman M, et al. Safety and efficacy of ketorolac tromethamine 0.4% ophthalmic solution in post-photorefractive keratectomy patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30: 1653–60PubMedCrossRef
19.
Krystal AD, Walsh JK, Laska E, et al. Sustained efficacy of eszopiclone over 6 months of nightly treatment: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in adults with chronic insomnia. Sleep 2003; 26: 793–9PubMed
20.
Clauw DJ, Mease P, Palmer RH, et al. Milnacipran for the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults: a 15-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose clinical trial. Clin Ther 2008; 30: 1988–2004PubMedCrossRef
21.
Climara Pro® prescribing information [online]. Available from URL: http://​dailymed.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​dailymed/​drugInfo.​ cfm?id=10549#nlm34076-0 [Accessed 2010 May 5]
Metadata
Title
Electronic Patient Diaries and Questionnaires — ePRO Now Delivering on the Promise
Author
Professor Brian Tiplady
Publication date
01-09-2010
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/11537600-000000000-00000

Other articles of this Issue 3/2010

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3/2010 Go to the issue

Original Research Article

Towards Patient-Centered Care for Depression

Original Research Article

Patient Views on Determinants of Compliance with Tuberculosis Treatment in the Eastern Cape, South Africa

Review Article

Quality of Life in Restless Legs Syndrome

Commentary

Technology, Reform, and Personal Medical Care

Original Research Article

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits