Scholarlink

Background <p>The impact of genetic intellectual disability (GID) on daily life is significant. To better understand the impact of GID, it is essential to measure relevant patient reported outcomes (PROs). The aim of this study is to provide an overview of PROs used for individuals with GID, laying the groundwork for a future generic core PRO set for GID.</p> Methods <p>To identify PROs used for individuals with GID, results of two literature reviews were integrated; (1) PROs extracted from a scoping review on outcomes in clinical trials, and (2) PROs identified from a scoping review on core outcome sets (COSs) for specific GIDs through a search in MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO, Embase, and the COMET database. Descriptive analyses were performed.</p> Results <p>In the first scoping review, 66 different PROs were identified. In the second scoping review, 22 different PROs were identified. After integrating PROs, 18 unique PROs remained, which were classified into a conceptual framework. Most frequently reported PROs were quality of life, perceived health, cognitive functioning, anxiety/stress, and depressive symptoms.</p> Conclusion <p>This study provides an overview of PROs used for individuals with GID. These results will assist in developing a generic core PRO set for GID, to harmonize PROs used in care and research.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Patient reported outcomes used in clinical trials and core outcome sets for individuals with genetic intellectual disability: a scoping review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月31日

查看全文
  • Nadia Y. van Silfhout,
  • Maud M. van Muilekom,
  • Clara D. van Karnebeek,
  • Joost G. Daams,
  • Lotte Haverman,
  • Agnies M. van Eeghen

摘要

Background

The impact of genetic intellectual disability (GID) on daily life is significant. To better understand the impact of GID, it is essential to measure relevant patient reported outcomes (PROs). The aim of this study is to provide an overview of PROs used for individuals with GID, laying the groundwork for a future generic core PRO set for GID.

Methods

To identify PROs used for individuals with GID, results of two literature reviews were integrated; (1) PROs extracted from a scoping review on outcomes in clinical trials, and (2) PROs identified from a scoping review on core outcome sets (COSs) for specific GIDs through a search in MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO, Embase, and the COMET database. Descriptive analyses were performed.

Results

In the first scoping review, 66 different PROs were identified. In the second scoping review, 22 different PROs were identified. After integrating PROs, 18 unique PROs remained, which were classified into a conceptual framework. Most frequently reported PROs were quality of life, perceived health, cognitive functioning, anxiety/stress, and depressive symptoms.

Conclusion

This study provides an overview of PROs used for individuals with GID. These results will assist in developing a generic core PRO set for GID, to harmonize PROs used in care and research.