Generic patient self-report and investigator report instruments of therapeutic safety and tolerability

Marissa N.D. Lassere*, Kent R. Johnson, Susanne Van Santen, Kerri Carlton, Joy Rappo, Rachel Michael, John R Kirwan, John P. Edmonds

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A patient self-report instrument was designed as a patient event index that maps to a parallel investigator instrument. Event importance (a composite of severity, frequency, and duration) was reported, but attribution was not required. The patient instrument used a checklist but also allowed for spontaneous reporting for new or unusual events. The investigator instrument (also a checklist) includes all events reported by the patient, as well as events such as signs, investigations, and diagnoses that would not generally be known to the patient. Presently, both patient and investigator instruments are to be used alongside current methods of adverse event reporting in clinical trials. The patient instrument would serve as a safety/tolerability index, whereas the investigator instrument would be a fully quantifiable (appropriately weighted), standardized adverse event index. As in many methodological projects in medicine, the overriding problem was the tradeoff between validity (comprehensiveness and accuracy) and feasibility (clarity and short administration time) in instrument development. A summary of pilot studies and results of instrument reliability and validity are presented.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2033-2036
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Rheumatology
Volume32
Issue number10
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2005

Keywords

  • Adverse event
  • Patient questionnaire
  • Randomized controlled trials

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Generic patient self-report and investigator report instruments of therapeutic safety and tolerability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this