Display options
Share it on

J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Apr 01;27(4):634-638. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz226.

Design and analytic considerations for using patient-reported health data in pragmatic clinical trials: report from an NIH Collaboratory roundtable.

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Frank W Rockhold, Jessica D Tenenbaum, Rachel Richesson, Keith A Marsolo, Emily C O'Brien


  1. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  2. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  3. Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  4. Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  5. Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

PMID: 32027359 PMCID: PMC7075526 DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocz226


Pragmatic clinical trials often entail the use of electronic health record (EHR) and claims data, but bias and quality issues associated with these data can limit their fitness for research purposes particularly for study end points. Patient-reported health (PRH) data can be used to confirm or supplement EHR and claims data in pragmatic trials, but these data can bring their own biases. Moreover, PRH data can complicate analyses if they are discordant with other sources. Using experience in the design and conduct of multi-site pragmatic trials, we itemize the strengths and limitations of PRH data and identify situational criteria for determining when PRH data are appropriate or ideal to fill gaps in the evidence collected from EHRs. To provide guidance for the scientific rationale and appropriate use of patient-reported data in pragmatic clinical trials, we describe approaches for ascertaining and classifying study end points and addressing issues of incomplete data, data alignment, and concordance. We conclude by identifying areas that require more research.

© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: [email protected].

Keywords: electronic health records; patient reported outcome measures; pragmatic clinical trials as topic; randomized controlled trials as topic, patient-generated health data


  1. J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 12;18(5):e110 - PubMed
  2. Med Care. 2013 Aug;51(8 Suppl 3):S30-7 - PubMed
  3. Med Care. 2006 Feb;44(2):132-40 - PubMed
  4. J Chronic Dis. 1967 Aug;20(8):637-48 - PubMed
  5. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Dec 21;103(24):1808-10 - PubMed
  6. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Sep;32(9):1608-15 - PubMed
  7. BMJ. 2008 Nov 11;337:a2390 - PubMed
  8. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2016 Aug;18(8):81 - PubMed
  9. Circulation. 2015 Apr 28;131(17):1477-85; discussion 1485 - PubMed
  10. Yearb Med Inform. 2014 Aug 15;9:215-23 - PubMed
  11. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Mar-Apr;19(2):219-24 - PubMed
  12. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Aug;50(8):614-7 - PubMed
  13. J Eval Clin Pract. 2015 Apr;21(2):339-46 - PubMed
  14. N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 4;375(5):454-63 - PubMed
  15. BMJ. 2015 May 08;350:h2147 - PubMed
  16. Thorax. 2014 Dec;69(12):1152-4 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support