Recommendations for the Electronic Migration and Implementation of Clinician-Reported Outcome Assessments in Clinical Trials

• Published in: Value in health 2022-07, Vol.25 (7), p.1090-1098
• Main Authors: Romero, Heather, DeBonis, Dan, O’Donohoe, Paul, Wyrwich, Kathleen W., Arnera, Valdo, Platko, Jill V., Willgoss, Tom, Harris, Kristina, Crescioni, Mabel, Steele, Shelly, Eremenco, Sonya
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: clinician-reported outcome; electronic clinical outcome assessment; electronic migration
• ISSN: 1098-3015; 1524-4733
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.02.012

Although best practices from electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are transferable, the migration of clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) assessments to electronic modes requires recommendations that address their unique properties, such as the user (eg, clinician), and complexity associated with programming of clinical content. Faithful migration remains essential to ensuring that the content and psychometric properties of the original scale (ie, validated reference) are preserved, such that clinicians completing the ClinRO assessments interpret and respond to the items the same way regardless of data collection mode. The authors present a framework for how to “faithfully” migrate electronic ClinRO assessments for successful deployment in clinical trials. Critical Path Institute’s Electronic PRO Consortium and PRO Consortium convened a consensus panel of representatives from member firms to develop recommendations for electronic migration and implementation of ClinRO assessments in clinical trials based on industry standards, regulatory guidelines where available, and relevant literature. The recommendations were reviewed and approved by all member firms from both consortia. Standard, minimal electronic modifications for ClinRO assessments are described. This article also outlines implementation steps, including planning, startup, electronic clinical outcome assessment system development, training, and deployment. The consensus panel proposes that functional clinical testing by a clinician or clinical outcome assessment expert, as well as copyright holder review of screenshots (if possible) are sufficient to support minimal modifications during migration. Additional evidence generation is proposed for modifications that deviate significantly from the validated reference. •Substantial literature and regulatory guidance exist for migration and implementation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in an electronic format (electronic PRO). Electronic clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) assessments require recommendations that address their unique properties. ClinRO assessments differ from PRO measures, in that a trained professional clinician, or rater, administers and scores the clinical outcomes based on their clinical interpretation, whereas patients self-report how they are feeling and functioning without interpretation from anyone else for PRO measures.•The authors present a framework for planning the migration and implementation of elec