Good Studies Evaluate the Disease While Great Studies Evaluate the Patient: Development and Application of a Desirability of Outcome Ranking Endpoint for Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Good Studies Evaluate the Disease While Great Studies Evaluate the Patient: Development and Application of a Desirability of Outcome Ranking Endpoint for Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection
المؤلفون: Thuy Tien T. Tran, Mical Paul, G. Ralph Corey, Henry F. Chambers, Scott R. Evans, Thomas L. Holland, Joshua S. Davis, Helen W. Boucher, Sara E. Cosgrove, Leonard Leibovici, Dafna Yahav, Steven Y. C. Tong, Vance G. Fowler, Sarah B Doernberg
بيانات النشر: Oxford University Press, 2018.
سنة النشر: 2018
مصطلحات موضوعية: 0301 basic medicine, Microbiology (medical), Adult, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus, medicine.medical_specialty, Staphylococcus aureus, 030106 microbiology, Bacteremia, Disease, Outcome (game theory), 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Risk Factors, Surveys and Questionnaires, Patient experience, Medicine, Humans, Multicenter Studies as Topic, 030212 general & internal medicine, Adverse effect, Articles and Commentaries, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, business.industry, Secondary data, Staphylococcal Infections, Survival Analysis, Confidence interval, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Clinical trial, Infectious Diseases, Ranking, Emergency medicine, business
الوصف: Background Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is an innovative approach in clinical trials to evaluate the global benefits and risks of an intervention. We developed and validated a DOOR endpoint for Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection (BSI) through a survey to infectious diseases clinicians and secondary analysis of trial data. Methods We administered a survey of 20 cases of S. aureus BSI, asking respondents to rank outcomes by global desirability. Correlations and percentage of pairwise agreement among rankings were estimated to inform development of a DOOR endpoint, which was applied to 2 prior S. aureus BSI trials. The probability that a patient randomly assigned to experimental treatment would have a better DOOR ranking than if assigned to control was estimated. Results were also analyzed using partial credit, which is analogous to scoring an academic test, assigning 100% to the most desirable outcome, 0% to the least, and "partial credit" to intermediate ranks. Results Forty-two recipients (97%) completed the survey. The DOOR endpoint fitting these rankings (r = 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 0.94) incorporated survival plus cumulative occurrence of adverse events, cure, infectious complications, and ongoing symptoms. Tailored versions of this endpoint were applied to 2 S. aureus BSI trials, and both demonstrated no benefit of the experimental treatment using DOOR and partial credit analysis. Conclusions Using S. aureus BSI as an exemplar, we developed a DOOR endpoint that can be used as a template for development of DOOR endpoints for other diseases. Future trials can incorporate DOOR to allow for global assessment of patient experience.
اللغة: English
URL الوصول: https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::a4669e1bb2363eb75499c04f61fe7c42
https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6495020/
Rights: OPEN
رقم الانضمام: edsair.doi.dedup.....a4669e1bb2363eb75499c04f61fe7c42
قاعدة البيانات: OpenAIRE