Suppr超能文献

基于患者报告结局测量的注册研究中反应率随时间变化的回顾。

Review of response rates over time in registry-based studies using patient-reported outcome measures.

机构信息

University of Oslo Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway

Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 6;10(8):e030808. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030808.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Gain an overview of expected response rates (RRs) to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical quality registry-based studies and long-term cohorts in order to better evaluate the validity of registries and registry-based studies. Examine the trends of RRs over time and how they vary with study type, questionnaire format, and the use of reminders.

DESIGN

Literature review with systematic search.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, kvalitetsregistre.no, kvalitetsregister.se and sundhed.dk.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Articles in all areas of medical research using registry-based data or cohort design with at least two follow-up time points collecting PROMs and reporting RRs. Annual reports of registries including PROMs that report RRs for at least two time points.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

RRs to PROMs.

RESULTS

A total of 10 articles, 12 registry reports and 6 registry articles were included in the review. The overall RR at baseline was 75%±22.1 but decreased over time. Cohort studies had a markedly better RR (baseline 97%±4.7) compared with registry-based data at all time points (baseline 72%±21.8). For questionnaire formats, paper had the highest RR at 86%±19.4, a mix of electronic and paper had the second highest at 71%±15.1 and the electronic-only format had a substantially lower RR at 42%±8.7. Sending one reminder (82%±16.5) or more than one reminder (76%±20.9) to non-responders resulted in a higher RR than sending no reminders (39%±6.7).

CONCLUSIONS

The large variation and downward trend of RRs to PROMs in cohort and registry-based studies are of concern and should be assessed and addressed when using registry data in both research and clinical practice.

摘要

目的

通过对基于临床质量登记研究和长期队列的患者报告结局测量(PROM)的预期反应率(RR)进行综述,以便更好地评估登记处和基于登记处的研究的有效性。考察 RR 随时间的变化趋势及其与研究类型、问卷格式以及使用提醒的关系。

设计

文献综述与系统检索。

资料来源

PubMed、MEDLINE、EMBASE、kvalitetsregistre.no、kvalitetsregister.se 和 sundhed.dk。

入选标准

使用基于登记的资料或队列设计的各医学研究领域的文章,至少有两个随访时间点收集 PROM 并报告 RR。登记处的年度报告,包括至少报告两个时间点 RR 的 PROM。

主要结局测量

PROM 的 RR。

结果

综述共纳入 10 篇文章、12 份登记处报告和 6 篇登记处文章。基线时的总体 RR 为 75%±22.1%,但随时间下降。与所有时间点的基于登记的资料相比,队列研究的 RR 明显更高(基线时为 97%±4.7)。对于问卷格式,纸质问卷的 RR 最高,为 86%±19.4,电子和纸质混合问卷的 RR 次之,为 71%±15.1,仅电子格式的 RR 显著较低,为 42%±8.7。对未应答者发送一次提醒(82%±16.5)或多次提醒(76%±20.9)的 RR 高于不发送提醒(39%±6.7)。

结论

队列和基于登记处的研究中 PROM 的 RR 变化较大且呈下降趋势,令人担忧,在研究和临床实践中使用登记数据时,应评估并处理这一问题。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3130/7412618/4e1629fa2dd7/bmjopen-2019-030808f01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验