Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine

2013 Edition
| Editors: Marc D. Gellman, J. Rick Turner

Patient-Reported Outcome

  • Hiroe Kikuchi
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_1303


Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are responses to questions or statements about their perceptions or activities, such as symptoms, capabilities, or performance of roles or responsibilities (Revicki, Hays, Cella, & Sloan, 2008). These responses are typically measured by self-completed questionnaires and combined in some way to create summary scores that can be used to measure concepts such as physical, psychological, or social functioning and well-being, or symptom burden or severity. Symptoms can be rated based on frequency, severity, duration, degree of bother, or impact on patient activities. PROs are increasingly accompanying the traditional clinical ways of measuring health and the effects of treatment on the patient, both nationally and internationally, in order to make a more comprehensive evaluation. According to this context, The Patient-Reported Outcome Information System (PROMIS®) initiative, funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH), began in 2004 with six...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. Boers, M. (2010). Standing on the promises: First wave validation reports of the patient-reported outcome measurement information system. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 1167–1168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). Initial adult health item banks and first-wave testing of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system network: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 1179–1194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cleeland, C. S., Sloan, J. A. & ASCPRO Organizing Group. (2010). Assessing the symptoms of cancer using patient-reported outcomes (ASCPRO): Searching for standards. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 39:1077–1085.Google Scholar
  4. Revicki, D., Hays, R. D., Cella, D., & Sloan, J. (2008). Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61, 102–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychosomatic ResearchNational Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and PsychiatryTokyoJapan