An Evaluation of Time Spent Completing Electronically Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1007/s43441-025-00767-1
Lucy Andersen, Michael Williams, Sheryl Pease, Harman Dhatt, Patricia Delong
{"title":"An Evaluation of Time Spent Completing Electronically Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials.","authors":"Lucy Andersen, Michael Williams, Sheryl Pease, Harman Dhatt, Patricia Delong","doi":"10.1007/s43441-025-00767-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important measures of efficacy in the context of clinical trials but are sometimes identified as time and resource intensive to study participants and site personnel. The objective of this research was to evaluate the amount of time that participants spend completing PROs via an electronic device in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials across several disease areas.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The electronic Clinical Outcome Assessment (eCOA) data were obtained from Johnson & Johnson clinical trials across various disease areas from 2016 to 2023. Data were acquired from internal and external sources including clinical trial sites and eCOA partners. In total, 82 trials were analyzed, containing data from 33,633 unique participants, and 1,083,994 measurements of completed electronic PRO instruments. After data cleaning, descriptive and multivariate analyses were performed. Electronic PRO completion time was examined in two ways: by time-per-item and time-per-instrument for each PRO.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On average, participants spend about 16 s per item and an average of 2 min to complete a PRO instrument electronically. The average time to complete PRO instruments varied significantly by disease area and most eCOA were completed on study site tablets (68%) or personal handheld devices (31%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, patients spend an average of 16 s per item and 2 min per PRO instrument in clinical trial studies. PROs are a crucial component of clinical trial outcomes data and can be efficiently completed electronically by participants in clinical trials in a short amount of time.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-025-00767-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important measures of efficacy in the context of clinical trials but are sometimes identified as time and resource intensive to study participants and site personnel. The objective of this research was to evaluate the amount of time that participants spend completing PROs via an electronic device in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials across several disease areas.

Methods: The electronic Clinical Outcome Assessment (eCOA) data were obtained from Johnson & Johnson clinical trials across various disease areas from 2016 to 2023. Data were acquired from internal and external sources including clinical trial sites and eCOA partners. In total, 82 trials were analyzed, containing data from 33,633 unique participants, and 1,083,994 measurements of completed electronic PRO instruments. After data cleaning, descriptive and multivariate analyses were performed. Electronic PRO completion time was examined in two ways: by time-per-item and time-per-instrument for each PRO.

Results: On average, participants spend about 16 s per item and an average of 2 min to complete a PRO instrument electronically. The average time to complete PRO instruments varied significantly by disease area and most eCOA were completed on study site tablets (68%) or personal handheld devices (31%).

Conclusions: Overall, patients spend an average of 16 s per item and 2 min per PRO instrument in clinical trial studies. PROs are a crucial component of clinical trial outcomes data and can be efficiently completed electronically by participants in clinical trials in a short amount of time.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对临床试验中完成电子收集的患者报告结果所用时间的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
An Evaluation of Time Spent Completing Electronically Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials. Regulatory, Translational, and Operational Considerations for the Incorporation of Biomarkers in Drug Development. A Proposed Confidence Ellipse Approach for Benefit-Risk Assessment in Clinical Trials. Data Monitoring Committee Reports: Telling the Data's Story. Risk-Based Quality Management: A Case for Centralized Monitoring.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1