2 posts tagged “online disease measurement”

PatientsLikeMe Unveils New Tool to Match Patients with Clinical Trials Worldwide

Posted March 13th, 2013 by

Launch at European NHS Healthcare Innovation Expo Comes as PatientsLikeMe Chairman Calls for Revolution in Disease Measurement

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. —  — The U.S.-based patient network and real-time research platform PatientsLikeMe unveils its global clinical trials tool today at Europe’s Healthcare Innovation Expo 2013, hosted by the National Health Service (NHS). The free tool, unveiled today by Research Director Paul Wicks Ph.D., draws on open data to match patients from around the globe with clinical trials based on their condition and location. The U.S. prototype was launched last year and has already helped thousands of patients find suitable clinical trials.  The tool is available at http://www.patientslikeme.com/clinical_trials.

Last week, PatientsLikeMe Co-founder and Chairman Jamie Heywood spoke about innovative solutions to healthcare at the 2013 Nuffield Trust Health Policy Summit in London. Nuffield Trust is an independent source of evidence-based research and policy analysis for improving health care in the UK. Heywood returns to London tomorrow to speak on the Expo’s Masterclass Stage about the importance of measurement in building a learning health system.

In his Nuffield speech, Heywood called for a “revolution in measurement,” or what he calls “measurement-based medicine.” He adds, “We should measure the severity of each condition and its impact on the patient. The measurement should support the patient in life choices, clinicians in care choices and researchers in learning what’s effective. And every patient should be measured as part of the care process to the degree appropriate for the severity of their condition, so that their experience can be used to guide the next patient.”


The “Immense Benefits” of Online Health Reporting: An Interview with ALS Study Author Dr. Thomas Meyer

Posted April 27th, 2012 by

Earlier this month, we told you about a new study showing that ALS patients reporting their health status over the Internet (using a rating scale known as the ALSFRS-R) is just as reliable as a trained nurse rating the patient’s score.   Now, we’d like to share our interview with lead study author Dr. Thomas Meyer, a neurologist at Charité University Hospital in Berlin, Germany.  What role did PatientsLikeMe play in this research?  And what are the study’s implications for the future of clinical trials?  Find out that and more in our interview with Dr. Meyer below.

Dr. Thomas Meyer, Neurologist at Charite University Hospital in Berlin

1.  When did you become interested in patient-reported outcomes?

In 2005, we first used tablet PCs in our outpatient department to capture patient-reported outcomes (PROs). To us neurologists, PROs play a crucial role. Many neurological conditions can be captured by means of PROs only – I am thinking of pain in neuropathies, spasticity in multiple sclerosis (MS), the subjective perception of movement ability in Parkinson’s syndrome and dyspnoea (breathing difficulty) in neuromuscular conditions, including ALS. Given this fact, we neurologists have always listened to our patients a little more carefully so that we can do a good job. Therefore, the systematic capturing of PROs is a natural process to us, and we are most happy to be able to support any advancement and positive development thereof.

2.  Your study showed remarkable agreement between the two ALSFRS-R reporting methods.  Were you surprised that they were so similar?

You are absolutely correct. Correlation here looks like a textbook example of medical statistics. We were indeed very surprised to find that the data were so unequivocal.  Notwithstanding, our previous experience with the offline electronic capturing of ALSFRS-R had taught us that the data captured in a personal interview are very close to those captured in computer-based self-assessments.

A Chart Showing the Striking Similarity Between ALSFRS-R Scores as Reported by ALS Patients (Bottom Axis) and Their Clinicians (Left Axis)

Then we took the next step and progressed from offline to online assessment. Other work groups had already shown good correlation between the face-to-face capturing of the score on the one hand, and data capturing over the phone on the other. That was very useful upfront information for us. Insofar, the success of our study didn’t come as a complete surprise to us.

3.  How did Dr. Paul Wicks, PatientsLikeMe’s Director of Research & Development, contribute to this research project?

Our great interest in the issue of PROs in ALS goes back a long time. Nevertheless, we were very much aware of the fact that PatientsLikeMe is by far the most experienced organization with regard to PROs worldwide and also the one that identifies with this topic most. So, a small group of four of us flew from Berlin to Boston to introduce our clinical trial to PatientsLikeMe and to learn from their experience. Once we had concluded the study, we flew to Boston once again to see Paul and to prepare the paper. We profited immensely from Paul’s input, and he gave the manuscript a superordinate perspective.

PatientsLikeMe Research & Development Director Paul Wicks, PhD

So it is for a good reason that he is listed as co-author of this publication. Overall, this scientific research project was a collaboration between the Charité University Hospital and PatientsLikeMe. I believe it is also an important, gratifying and affirming experience for PatientsLikeMe to see that in terms of methodology the online capturing of PROs is at least equal to an interview conducted face-to-face. I can even imagine situations where the online mode of capturing PROs is actually better than a personal interview, especially where rather complicated and very private issues are addressed. This is just one of the many points we discussed vividly with Paul.

4.  Do you believe online patient reporting will become an acceptable practice for clinical trials?  What are the ramifications if it does?

I can very well imagine that the online capturing of PROs will one day become an integral part of clinical trials. It is quite an obvious thing; however, owing to regulatory requirements, it will be quite some time before it will actually be possible to implement this. The bottom line is that clinical trials will have to be conducted for each score demonstrating equivalence between paper-based and web-based capturing. Not all of the scores have actually been evaluated for online capturing. Another critical point surely is Internet access.

Having said that, it certainly also depends on the patient group and the actual medical condition under examination. I suppose that from a medical-ethical point of view it is problematic to exclude patients from a trial simply because they are unable to realize an online completion of the score. In this regard, I believe the first step to be taken must be to demonstrate equivalence between online and offline capturing of the score. Then one could give patients the option of using online assessment in the context of participating in a clinical trial and see what they would prefer to do.

The benefits would be immense. This method could highly enhance the quality of the data, the efficiency of data capturing and, not least of all, it would help reduce the costs of a clinical trial. I believe that online assessment will be a matter of course in the future, but not immediately.