• EOfR D (2011) Patients’ Priorities and Needs for Rare Diseases Research 2014–2020


    Google Scholar
     

  • Rowe F, Wormald R, Cable R, Acton M, Bonstein K, Bowen M et al (2014) The Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (SLV-PSP): overview and results of the research prioritisation survey process. BMJ Open 4(7):e004905

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Braithwaite T, Subramanian A, Petzold A, Galloway J, Adderley NJ, Mollan SP et al (2020) Trends in Optic Neuritis Incidence and Prevalence in the UK and Association With Systemic and Neurologic Disease. JAMA Neurol 77(12):1514–1523

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Baker KF, Isaacs JD (2018) Novel therapies for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: What can we learn from their use in rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, psoriasis, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis? Ann Rheum Dis 77(2):175–187

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Dean S, Mathers JM, Calvert M, Kyte DG, Conroy D, Folkard A et al (2017) “The patient is speaking”: discovering the patient voice in ophthalmology. Br J Ophthalmol 101(6):700–708

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Braithwaite T, Calvert M, Gray A, Pesudovs K, Denniston AK (2019) The use of patient-reported outcome research in modern ophthalmology: impact on clinical trials and routine clinical practice. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 10:9–24

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • USFaD A. Patient-focused drug development guidance series for enhancing the incorporation of the patient’s voice in medical product development and regulatory decision making. : FDA; 2020 [https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs/fda-patient-focused-drug-development-guidance-series-enhancing-incorporation-patients-voice-medical].

  • Patrick DL, Burke LB, Powers JH, Scott JA, Rock EP, Dawisha S et al (2007) Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value Health 10(Suppl 2):S125–S137

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Khadka J, McAlinden C, Pesudovs K (2013) Quality assessment of ophthalmic questionnaires: review and recommendations. Optom Vis Sci 90(8):720–744

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Stover AM, McLeod LD, Langer MM, Chen WH, Reeve BB (2019) State of the psychometric methods: patient-reported outcome measure development and refinement using item response theory. J Patient Rep Outcomes 3(1):50

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Denniston AK, Holland GN, Kidess A, Nussenblatt RB, Okada AA, Rosenbaum JT et al (2015) Heterogeneity of primary outcome measures used in clinical trials of treatments for intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis. Orphanet J Rare Dis 10:97

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ramanan AV, Dick AD, Benton D, Compeyrot-Lacassagne S, Dawoud D, Hardwick B et al (2014) A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab in combination with methotrexate for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis associated uveitis (SYCAMORE Trial). Trials 15:14

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sheppard J, Joshi A, Betts KA, Hudgens S, Tari S, Chen N et al (2017) Effect of Adalimumab on Visual Functioning in Patients With Noninfectious Intermediate Uveitis, Posterior Uveitis, and Panuveitis in the VISUAL-1 and VISUAL-2 Trials. JAMA Ophthalmol 135(6):511–518

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ramanan AV, Dick AD, Jones AP, Guly C, Hardwick B, Hickey H et al (2018) A phase II trial protocol of Tocilizumab in anti-TNF refractory patients with JIA-associated uveitis (the APTITUDE trial). BMC Rheumatol 2:4

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • University of Bristol BTC (2020) Adalimumab vs placebo as add-on to Standard Therapy for autoimmune Uveitis: Tolerability, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness: a randomized controlled trial


    Google Scholar
     

  • Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment Trial Research G, Kempen JH, Altaweel MM, Holbrook JT, Jabs DA, Sugar EA (2010) The multicenter uveitis steroid treatment trial: rationale, design, and baseline characteristics. Am J Ophthalmol. 149(4):550–61 e10

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Braithwaite TL XP, J; Aiyegbusi O.L; Bayliss, S; Calvert, M; Pesudovs, K; Moore, D; Denniston, A. Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in adult patients with ocular immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (uveitis, scleritis or optic neuritis): a systematic review: PROSPERO 2019 [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019151652].

  • Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • FaDAF UDoHaHS. Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labelling Claims 2009 [http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf ].

  • Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL et al (2010) The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 63(7):737–745

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL et al (2010) The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 19(4):539–549

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Prem Senthil M, Khadka J, Pesudovs K (2017) Assessment of patient-reported outcomes in retinal diseases: a systematic review. Surv Ophthalmol 62(4):546–582

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Pesudovs K, Burr JM, Harley C, Elliott DB (2007) The development, assessment, and selection of questionnaires. Optom Vis Sci 84(8):663–674

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lundstrom M, Pesudovs K (2009) Catquest-9SF patient outcomes questionnaire: nine-item short-form Rasch-scaled revision of the Catquest questionnaire. J Cataract Refract Surg 35(3):504–513

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kandel H, Khadka J, Goggin M, Pesudovs K (2017) Patient-reported Outcomes for Assessment of Quality of Life in Refractive Error: A Systematic Review. Optom Vis Sci 94(12):1102–1119

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kandel H, Khadka J, Lundstrom M, Goggin M, Pesudovs K (2017) Questionnaires for Measuring Refractive Surgery Outcomes. J Refract Surg 33(6):416–424

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kumaran SE, Khadka J, Baker R, Pesudovs K (2018) Patient-reported outcome measures in amblyopia and strabismus: a systematic review. Clin Exp Optom 101(4):460–484

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kandel H, Pesudovs K, Watson SL (2020) Measurement of Quality of Life in Keratoconus. Cornea 39(3):386–393

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Weber MB (2019) What Influences Saturation? Estimating Sample Sizes in Focus Group Research. Qual Health Res 29(10):1483–1496

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM et al (2018) COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Qual Life Res 27(5):1171–1179

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Barry JA, Folkard A, Denniston AK, Moran E, Ayliffe W (2014) Development and validation of quality-of-life questionnaires for birdshot chorioretinopathy. Ophthalmology. 121(7):1488–9 e2

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wu AW, Coleson LC, Holbrook J, Jabs DA (1996) Measuring visual function and quality of life in patients with cytomegalovirus retinitis. Development of a questionnaire. Studies of Ocular Complication of AIDS Research Group. Arch Ophthalmol. 114(7):841–7

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Martin BK, Kaplan Gilpin AM, Jabs DA, Wu AW (2001) Studies of Ocular Complications of ARG. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of general and disease-specific quality of life measures in a clinical trial for cytomegalovirus retinitis. J Clin Epidemiol. 54(4):376–86

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Patel AS, Siegert RJ, Creamer D, Larkin G, Maher TM, Renzoni EA et al (2013) The development and validation of the King’s Sarcoidosis Questionnaire for the assessment of health status. Thorax 68(1):57–65

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mangione CM, Lee PP, Gutierrez PR, Spritzer K, Berry S, Hays RD et al (2001) Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol 119(7):1050–1058

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Naik RK, Rentz AM, Foster CS, Lightman S, Belfort R Jr, Lowder C et al (2013) Normative comparison of patient-reported outcomes in patients with noninfectious uveitis. JAMA Ophthalmol 131(2):219–225

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Naik RK, Gries KS, Rentz AM, Kowalski JW, Revicki DA (2013) Psychometric evaluation of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire and Visual Function Questionnaire Utility Index in patients with non-infectious intermediate and posterior uveitis. Qual Life Res 22(10):2801–2808

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mangione CM, Berry S, Spritzer K, Janz NK, Klein R, Owsley C et al (1998) Identifying the content area for the 51-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire: results from focus groups with visually impaired persons. Arch Ophthalmol 116(2):227–233

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mangione CM, Lee PP, Pitts J, Gutierrez P, Berry S, Hays RD (1998) Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ). NEI-VFQ Field Test Investigators Arch Ophthalmol 116(11):1496–1504

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, Javitt JC, Sharkey P, Cassard SD et al (1994) The VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol. 112(5):630–8

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE Jr (1988) The MOS short-form general health survey Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care. 26(7):724–35

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 30(6):473–83

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Petrillo J, Cano SJ, McLeod LD, Coon CD (2015) Using classical test theory, item response theory, and Rasch measurement theory to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures: a comparison of worked examples. Value Health 18(1):25–34

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Devine JHK, Skup M, Chao J, Ganguli A, Sheppard J (2015) Establishing content validity for the National Eye Institute’s Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) in intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis. Qual Life Res 24:159


    Google Scholar
     

  • Globe D, Varma R, Azen SP, Paz S, Yu E, Preston-Martin S et al (2003) Psychometric performance of the NEI VFQ-25 in visually normal Latinos: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44(4):1470–1478

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Suner IJ, Kokame GT, Yu E, Ward J, Dolan C, Bressler NM (2009) Responsiveness of NEI VFQ-25 to changes in visual acuity in neovascular AMD: validation studies from two phase 3 clinical trials. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50(8):3629–3635

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Marella M, Pesudovs K, Keeffe JE, O’Connor PM, Rees G, Lamoureux EL (2010) The psychometric validity of the NEI VFQ-25 for use in a low-vision population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51(6):2878–2884

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Pesudovs K, Gothwal VK, Wright T, Lamoureux EL (2010) Remediating serious flaws in the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. J Cataract Refract Surg 36(5):718–732

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lloyd AJ, Loftus J, Turner M, Lai G, Pleil A (2013) Psychometric validation of the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 in patients with diabetic macular edema. Health Qual Life Outcomes 11:10

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Petrillo J, Bressler NM, Lamoureux E, Ferreira A, Cano S (2017) Development of a new Rasch-based scoring algorithm for the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire to improve its interpretability. Health Qual Life Outcomes 15(1):157

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Braithwaite T, Davis N, Galloway J (2019) Cochrane corner: why we still don’t know whether anti-TNF biologic therapies impact uveitic macular oedema. Eye (Lond) 33(12):1830–1832

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Moore P, Jackson C, Mutch K, Methley A, Pollard C, Hamid S et al (2016) Patient-reported outcome measure for neuromyelitis optica: pretesting of preliminary instrument and protocol for further development in accordance with international guidelines. BMJ Open 6(9):e011142

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Khadka J, Fenwick E, Lamoureux E, Pesudovs K (2016) Methods to Develop the Eye-tem Bank to Measure Ophthalmic Quality of Life. Optom Vis Sci 93(12):1485–1494

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fenwick EK, Barnard J, Gan A, Loe BS, Khadka J, Pesudovs K et al (2020) Computerized Adaptive Tests: Efficient and Precise Assessment of the Patient-Centered Impact of Diabetic Retinopathy. Transl Vis Sci Technol 9(7):3

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Slade A, Isa F, Kyte D, Pankhurst T, Kerecuk L, Ferguson J et al (2018) Patient reported outcome measures in rare diseases: a narrative review. Orphanet J Rare Dis 13(1):61

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jensen RE, Rothrock NE, DeWitt EM, Spiegel B, Tucker CA, Crane HM et al (2015) The role of technical advances in the adoption and integration of patient-reported outcomes in clinical care. Med Care 53(2):153–159

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rotenstein LS, Huckman RS, Wagle NW (2017) Making Patients and Doctors Happier – The Potential of Patient-Reported Outcomes. N Engl J Med 377(14):1309–1312

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • FD A. Patient-Focused Drug Development Guidance Series for Enhancing the Incorporation of the Patient’s Voice in Medical Product Development and Regulatory Decision Making 2020 [https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs/fda-patient-focused-drug-development-guidance-series-enhancing-incorporation-patients-voice-medical].

  • Crossnohere NL, Brundage M, Calvert MJ, King M, Reeve BB, Thorner E et al (2021) International guidance on the selection of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials: a review. Qual Life Res 30(1):21–40

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Calvert M, Kyte D, Mercieca-Bebber R, Slade A, Chan AW, King MT et al (2018) Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-PRO Extension. JAMA 319(5):483–494

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Calvert M, Brundage M, Jacobsen PB, Schunemann HJ, Efficace F (2013) The CONSORT Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) extension: implications for clinical trials and practice. Health Qual Life Outcomes 11:184

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Benjamin K, Vernon MK, Patrick DL, Perfetto E, Nestler-Parr S, Burke L (2017) Patient-Reported Outcome and Observer-Reported Outcome Assessment in Rare Disease Clinical Trials: An ISPOR COA Emerging Good Practices Task Force Report. Value Health 20(7):838–855

    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rights and permissions

    Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

    Disclaimer:

    This article is autogenerated using RSS feeds and has not been created or edited by OA JF.

    Click here for Source link (https://www.springeropen.com/)

    Loading