Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jun 15;6(6):e010938.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010938.

Design, implementation and reporting strategies to reduce the instance and impact of missing patient-reported outcome (PRO) data: a systematic review

Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber  1 , Michael J Palmer  2 , Michael Brundage  2 , Melanie Calvert  3 , Martin R Stockler  4 , Madeleine T King  1
Affiliations

Design, implementation and reporting strategies to reduce the instance and impact of missing patient-reported outcome (PRO) data: a systematic review

Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide important information about the impact of treatment from the patients' perspective. However, missing PRO data may compromise the interpretability and value of the findings. We aimed to report: (1) a non-technical summary of problems caused by missing PRO data; and (2) a systematic review by collating strategies to: (A) minimise rates of missing PRO data, and (B) facilitate transparent interpretation and reporting of missing PRO data in clinical research. Our systematic review does not address statistical handling of missing PRO data.

Data sources: MEDLINE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases (inception to 31 March 2015), and citing articles and reference lists from relevant sources.

Eligibility criteria: English articles providing recommendations for reducing missing PRO data rates, or strategies to facilitate transparent interpretation and reporting of missing PRO data were included.

Methods: 2 reviewers independently screened articles against eligibility criteria. Discrepancies were resolved with the research team. Recommendations were extracted and coded according to framework synthesis.

Results: 117 sources (55% discussion papers, 26% original research) met the eligibility criteria. Design and methodological strategies for reducing rates of missing PRO data included: incorporating PRO-specific information into the protocol; carefully designing PRO assessment schedules and defining termination rules; minimising patient burden; appointing a PRO coordinator; PRO-specific training for staff; ensuring PRO studies are adequately resourced; and continuous quality assurance. Strategies for transparent interpretation and reporting of missing PRO data include utilising auxiliary data to inform analysis; transparently reporting baseline PRO scores, rates and reasons for missing data; and methods for handling missing PRO data.

Conclusions: The instance of missing PRO data and its potential to bias clinical research can be minimised by implementing thoughtful design, rigorous methodology and transparent reporting strategies. All members of the research team have a responsibility in implementing such strategies.

Keywords: health-related quality of life; methodology; missing data; patient-reported outcomes; quality assurance; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow diagram. PRO, patient-reported outcome.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cherny NI, Sullivan R, Dafni U et al. A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Ann Oncol 2015;26:1547–73. 10.1093/annonc/mdv249 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. FDA, 2009. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/UCM193282.pdf (accessed 10 Mar 2014). - PMC - PubMed
    1. European Medicines Agency. Oncology Working Party. Draft Reflection Paper on the use of patient reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies. EMA, 2014. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guidelin... (accessed 2 Sept 2014). - PubMed
    1. Little RJ, D'Agostino R, Cohen ML et al. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1355–60. 10.1056/NEJMsr1203730 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bernhard J, Cella DF, Coates AS et al. Missing quality of life data in cancer clinical trials: serious problems and challenges. Stat Med 1998;17:517–32. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980315/15)17:5/7<517::AID-SIM799>3.0.CO;2-S - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources