International perspectives on suboptimal patient‐reported outcome trial design and reporting in cancer clinical trials: A qualitative study
Published 2021 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
International perspectives on suboptimal patient‐reported outcome trial design and reporting in cancer clinical trials: A qualitative study
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
Cancer Medicine
Volume 10, Issue 16, Pages 5475-5487
Publisher
Wiley
Online
2021-07-05
DOI
10.1002/cam4.4111
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Systematic Evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcome Protocol Content and Reporting in Cancer Trials
- (2019) Derek Kyte et al. JNCI-Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis
- (2019) Samantha Cruz Rivera et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
- Health-related quality of life in adults with relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated with blinatumomab
- (2018) Max S. Topp et al. BLOOD
- Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols
- (2018) Melanie Calvert et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Incorporating the patient experience into regulatory decision making in the USA, Europe, and Canada
- (2018) Paul G Kluetz et al. LANCET ONCOLOGY
- Trials with patient-reported outcomes registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)
- (2018) Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Evaluation of patient-reported outcome protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study qualitative protocol
- (2018) Ameeta Retzer et al. BMJ Open
- Moving forward toward standardizing analysis of quality of life data in randomized cancer clinical trials
- (2018) Andrew Bottomley et al. Clinical Trials
- Feasibility of Implementing the Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in a Multicenter Trial: NCCTG N1048
- (2018) Ethan Basch et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
- Assessing the Financial Value of Patient Engagement
- (2017) Bennett Levitan et al. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science
- The patient-reported outcome content of international ovarian cancer randomised controlled trial protocols
- (2016) Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when, and how
- (2016) Jose A Sacristan et al. Patient Preference and Adherence
- Design, implementation and reporting strategies to reduce the instance and impact of missing patient-reported outcome (PRO) data: a systematic review
- (2016) Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber et al. BMJ Open
- Planning and reporting of quality-of-life outcomes in cancer trials
- (2015) S. Schandelmaier et al. ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
- Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting across cancer randomized controlled trials according to the CONSORT patient-reported outcome extension: A pooled analysis of 557 trials
- (2015) Fabio Efficace et al. CANCER
- Inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures in registered clinical trials: Evidence from ClinicalTrials.gov (2007–2013)
- (2015) E. Vodicka et al. Contemporary Clinical Trials
- The level of patient-reported outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of brain tumour patients: A systematic review
- (2014) Linda Dirven et al. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
- Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Randomized Trials
- (2013) Melanie Calvert et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Toward Patient-Centered Drug Development in Oncology
- (2013) Ethan Basch NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
- The Use of Patient-reported Outcomes (PRO) Within Comparative Effectiveness Research
- (2012) Sara Ahmed et al. MEDICAL CARE
Discover Peeref hubs
Discuss science. Find collaborators. Network.
Join a conversationBecome a Peeref-certified reviewer
The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.
Get Started