Search

ObjectiveTo describe the development and validation of a novel patient reported outcome measure for symptom burden from long covid, the symptom burden questionnaire for long covid (SBQ-LC).DesignMultiphase, prospective mixed methods study.SettingRemote data collection and social media channels in the United Kingdom, 14 April to 1 August 2021.Participants13 adults (aged ≥18 years) with self-reported long covid and 10 clinicians evaluated content validity. 274 adults with long covid field tested the draft questionnaire.Main outcome measuresPublished systematic reviews informed development of SBQ-LC’s conceptual framework and initial item pool. Thematic analysis of transcripts from cognitive debriefing interviews and online clinician surveys established content validity. Consensus discussions with the patient and public involvement group of the Therapies for Long COVID in non-hospitalised individuals: From symptoms, patient reported outcomes and immunology to targeted therapies (TLC Study) confirmed face validity. Rasch analysis of field test data guided item and scale refinement and provided initial evidence of the SBQ-LC’s measurement properties.ResultsSBQ-LC (version 1.0) is a modular instrument measuring patient reported outcomes and is composed of 17 independent scales with promising psychometric properties. Respondents rate their symptom burden during the past seven days using a dichotomous response or 4 point rating scale. Each scale provides coverage of a different symptom domain and returns a summed raw score that can be transformed to a linear (0-100) score. Higher scores represent higher symptom burden. After rating scale refinement and item reduction, all scales satisfied the Rasch model requirements for unidimensionality (principal component analysis of residuals: first residual contrast values 0.4). Across the 17 scales, person reliability ranged from 0.34 to 0.87, person separation ranged from 0.71 to 2.56, item separation ranged from 1.34 to 13.86, and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) ranged from 0.56 to 0.91.ConclusionsSBQ-LC (version 1.0) is a comprehensive patient reported outcome instrument developed using modern psychometric methods. It measures symptoms of long covid important to people with lived experience of the condition and may be used to evaluate the impact of interventions and inform best practice in clinical management.

IntroductionIndividuals with COVID-19 frequently experience symptoms and impaired quality of life beyond 4–12 weeks, commonly referred to as Long COVID. Whether Long COVID is one or several distinct syndromes is unknown. Establishing the evidence base for appropriate therapies is needed. We aim to evaluate the symptom burden and underlying pathophysiology of Long COVID syndromes in non-hospitalised individuals and evaluate potential therapies.Methods and analysisA cohort of 4000 non-hospitalised individuals with a past COVID-19 diagnosis and 1000 matched controls will be selected from anonymised primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, and invited by their general practitioners to participate on a digital platform (Atom5). Individuals will report symptoms, quality of life, work capability and patient-reported outcome measures. Data will be collected monthly for 1 year.Statistical clustering methods will be used to identify distinct Long COVID-19 symptom clusters. Individuals from the four most prevalent clusters and two control groups will be invited to participate in the BioWear substudy which will further phenotype Long COVID symptom clusters by measurement of immunological parameters and actigraphy.We will review existing evidence on interventions for postviral syndromes and Long COVID to map and prioritise interventions for each newly characterised Long COVID syndrome. Recommendations will be made using the cumulative evidence in an expert consensus workshop. A virtual supportive intervention will be coproduced with patients and health service providers for future evaluation.Individuals with lived experience of Long COVID will be involved throughout this programme through a patient and public involvement group.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Solihull Research Ethics Committee, West Midlands (21/WM/0203). Research findings will be presented at international conferences, in peer-reviewed journals, to Long COVID patient support groups and to policymakers.Trial registration number1567490.

ObjectiveTo describe the development and initial validation of a novel patient-reported outcome measure of Long COVID symptom burden, the Symptom-Burden Questionnaire for Long COVID (SBQ™-LC).Method and FindingsThis multi-phase, prospective mixed-methods study took place between April and August 2021 in the United Kingdom (UK). A conceptual framework and initial item pool were developed from published systematic reviews. Further concept elicitation and content validation was undertaken with adults with lived experience (n = 13) and clinicians (n = 10), and face validity was confirmed by the Therapies for Long COVID Study Patient and Public Involvement group (n = 25). The draft SBQ™-LC was field tested by adults with self-reported Long COVID recruited via social media and international Long COVID support groups (n = 274). Thematic analysis of interview and survey transcripts established content validity and informed construction of the draft questionnaire. Rasch analysis of field test data guided item and scale refinement and provided evidence of the final SBQ™-LC’s measurement properties. The Rasch-derived SBQ™-LC is composed of 17 independent scales with promising psychometric properties. Respondents rate symptom burden during the past 7-days using a dichotomous response or 4-point rating scale. Each scale provides coverage of a different symptom domain and returns a summed raw score that may be converted to a linear (0 – 100) score. Higher scores represent higher symptom burden.ConclusionsThe SBQ™-LC is a comprehensive patient-reported assessment of Long COVID symptom burden developed using modern psychometric methods. It measures symptoms of Long COVID important to individuals with lived experience and may be used to evaluate the impact of interventions and inform best practice in clinical management.

IntroductionIndividuals with COVID-19 frequently experience symptoms and impaired quality of life beyond 4-12 weeks, commonly referred to as Long COVID. Whether Long COVID is one or several distinct syndromes is unknown. Establishing the evidence base for appropriate therapies is needed. We aim to evaluate the symptom burden and underlying pathophysiology of Long COVID syndromes in non-hospitalised individuals and evaluate potential therapies.Methods and analysisA cohort of 4000 non-hospitalised individuals with a past COVID-19 diagnosis and 1000 matched controls will be selected from anonymised primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and invited by their general practitioners to participate on a digital platform (Atom5™). Individuals will report symptoms, quality of life, work capability, and patient reported outcome measures. Data will be collected monthly for one year.Statistical clustering methods will be used to identify distinct Long COVID symptom clusters. Individuals from the four most prevalent clusters and two control groups will be invited to participate in the BioWear sub-study which will further phenotype Long COVID symptom clusters by measurement of immunological parameters and actigraphy.We will review existing evidence on interventions for post-viral syndromes and Long COVID to map and prioritise interventions for each newly characterised Long COVID syndrome. Recommendations will be made using the cumulated evidence in an expert consensus workshop. A virtual supportive intervention will be coproduced with patients and health service providers for future evaluation.Individuals with lived experience of Long COVID will be involved throughout this programme through a patient and public involvement group.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Solihull Research Ethics Committee, West Midlands (21/WM/0203). The study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry (1567490). Research findings will be presented at international conferences, in peer-reviewed journals, to Long COVID patient support groups and to policymakers.Article SummaryStrengths and limitations of the studyThe study will generate a nationally representative cohort of individuals with Long COVID recruited from primary care.We will recruit controls matched on a wide range of demographic and clinical factors to assess differences in symptoms between people with Long COVID and similar individuals without a history of COVID-19.We will use a newly developed electronic patient reported outcome measure (Symptom Burden Questionnaire™) for Long COVID to comprehensively assess a wide range of symptoms highlighted by existing literature, patients, and clinicians.Immunological, proteomic, genetic, and wearable data captured in the study will allow deep phenotyping of Long COVID syndromes to help better target therapies.A limitation is that a significant proportion of non-hospitalised individuals affected by COVID-19 in the first wave of the pandemic will lack confirmatory testing and will be excluded from recruitment to the study.

IntroductionThe use of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems to capture PRO data in clinical trials is increasing; however, their feasibility, acceptability and utility in clinical trials of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are not yet well understood. This protocol describes a qualitative study that aims to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of ePRO data capture using a trial-specific ePRO system (the PROmics system) within an advanced therapy trial involving patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease (rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) and Crohn’s disease).Methods and analysisThis protocol for a remote, qualitative, interview-based feasibility study is embedded within the POLARISE trial, a single-arm, phase II, multisite ATMP basket trial in the UK. 10–15 patients enrolled in the POLARISE trial and 10–15 research team members at the trial sites will be recruited. Participants will take part in semistructured interviews which will be transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically according to the framework method. Data collection and analysis will occur concurrently and iteratively. Researcher triangulation will be used to achieve a consensus-based analysis, enhancing rigour and trustworthiness.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the London—West London and GTAC Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 21/LO/0475). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants prior to data collection. The study findings will be published in peer-review journals and disseminated via conference presentations and other media. Our patient and public involvement and engagement group and ATMP stakeholder networks will be consulted to maximise dissemination and impact.Trial registration numberISRCTN80103507.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in clinical trials to provide valuable evidence on the impact of disease and treatment on patients' symptoms, function and quality of life. High-quality PRO data from trials can inform shared decision-making, regulatory and economic analyses and health policy. Recent evidence suggests the PRO content of past trial protocols was often incomplete or unclear, leading to research waste. To address this issue, international, consensus-based, PRO-specific guidelines were developed: the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT)-PRO Extension. The SPIRIT-PRO Extension is a 16-item checklist which aims to improve the content and quality of aspects of clinical trial protocols relating to PRO data collection to minimise research waste, and ultimately better inform patient-centred care. This SPIRIT-PRO explanation and elaboration (E&E) paper provides information to promote understanding and facilitate uptake of the recommended checklist items, including a comprehensive protocol template. For each SPIRIT-PRO item, we provide a detailed description, one or more examples from existing trial protocols and supporting empirical evidence of the item's importance. We recommend this paper and protocol template be used alongside the SPIRIT 2013 and SPIRIT-PRO Extension paper to optimise the transparent development and review of trial protocols with PROs. ispartof: BMJ OPEN vol:11 issue:6 ispartof: location:England status: published

Over the past 30 years, environmental assessment requirements and practices have become more participative, ambitious, integrative, and comprehensive. Environmental assessments at the strategic level, including those focused on trade agreements, should reflect this progress. This paper applies seven basic principles of best practice in environmental assessment to an evaluation of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation's (CEC) framework for assessing the environmental effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It finds that the CEC's final analytic framework could achieve a higher level of environmental assessment that is more credible, efficient, and appropriately focused on sustainability issues. This would require adopting a purpose that centres on achieving sustainability, ensuring consideration of alternatives, and incorporating and encouraging a more open and participative process.

Results of the membership services survey conducted at the 19th conference of the HIMAA, Brisbane, October 1998

The South Australian Health Commission has embarked on a long term project to establish an Electronic Patient Record (EPR) for South Australia. The process requires extensive evaluation at the conclusion of each phase of development using a range of existing and purpose-developed evaluation tools. This paper describes a purpose-developed evaluation tool that uses the functional aspects of, and existing standards for, paper-based medical records in hospitals as its basis. The resulting EPR Standards are a tool which can be used to establish a benchmark against which to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of an electronic patient record.

E. S. Higgs, ed. Papers in Economic Prehistory. Studies by Members and Associates of the British Academy Major Research Project in the Early History of Agriculture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. x + 219 pp. Illustrations, figures, tables, bibliography and index. $15.50.