By: Katie Soisson, Policy Associate
There are many different types of health outcome measures that can be classified by the type of information collected or how the information was collected (e.g., patient or clinician report).
Increasingly, we have seen terms for certain outcomes such as “patient-centered,” “patient-relevant”, or “patient-oriented.” There are vast inconsistencies in how these terms are used, what they mean, and how they are different from traditional outcomes, so there is confusion about what a patient-centered outcome actually is.
In fact, this confusion has led many to believe that a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure is “patient-centered” simply because it was reported by the patient.
So, what is the difference?
For an outcome measure to be “patient-centered,” it must measure something that patients identify as being most important to them. A variety of methods can be used to identify which outcomes are important to patients. These may include focus groups, patient interviews, or open-ended surveys.
Collaborating with patient advocacy organizations or online patient communities helps researchers identify diverse and representative patient samples.
But patient advocacy organizations won’t solve this issue alone, which is why we hope you will join us on Wednesday, Nov. 7 from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. ET to learn more about the difference between patient-centered outcomes and patient-reported outcomes, and why we need patient-centered PROs in research and care. Register for the webinar here. We suggest you read this short pre-read before the webinar.