Patient-reported outcomes in meta-analyses – Part 1: assessing risk of bias and combining outcomes
Open Access
- 1 January 2013
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
- Vol. 11 (1) , 109
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-109
Abstract
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials that include patient-reported outcomes (PROs) often provide crucial information for patients and clinicians facing challenging health care decisions. Based on emerging methods, guidance on combining PROs in meta-analysis is likely to enhance their usefulness. The objectives of this paper are: i) to describe PROs and why they are important for health care decision-making, ii) illustrate the key risk of bias issues that systematic reviewers should consider and, iii) address outcome characteristics of PROs and provide guidance for combining outcomes. We suggest a step-by-step approach to addressing issues of PROs in meta-analyses. Systematic reviewers should begin by asking themselves if trials have addressed all the important effects of treatment on patients’ quality of life. If the trials have addressed PROs, have investigators chosen the appropriate instruments? In particular, does evidence suggest the PROs used are valid and responsive, and is the review free of outcome reporting bias? Systematic reviewers must then decide how to categorize PROs and when to pool results.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- Content Validity—Establishing and Reporting the Evidence in Newly Developed Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments for Medical Product Evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report: Part 1—Eliciting Concepts for a New PRO InstrumentPublished by Elsevier ,2011
- Outcome selection and role of patient reported outcomes in contemporary cardiovascular trials: systematic reviewBMJ, 2010
- Improving the interpretation of quality of life evidence in meta-analyses: the application of minimal important difference unitsHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes, 2010
- Psychological Intervention for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsPsychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 2009
- What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?BMJ, 2008
- Association Between Unreported Outcomes and Effect Size Estimates in Cochrane Meta-analysesJAMA, 2007
- Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2004
- Health status measurement in chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseThorax, 2001
- Correlation of hemodynamic and functional variables with the angiographic extent of peripheral arterial occlusive diseaseVascular Medicine, 1999
- A 12-Item Short-Form Health SurveyMedical Care, 1996