Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle      Open Access: True


Article Info

DATE

2006-10-11

AUTHORS

, ,

ABSTRACT

This guidance describes how the FDA evaluates patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used as effectiveness endpoints in clinical trials. It also describes our current thinking on how sponsors can develop and use study results measured by PRO instruments to support claims in approved product labeling (see appendix point 1). It does not address the use of PRO instruments for purposes beyond evaluation of claims made about a drug or medical product in its labeling. By explicitly addressing the review issues identified in this guidance, sponsors can increase the efficiency of their endpoint discussions with the FDA during the product development process, streamline the FDA's review of PRO endpoint adequacy, and provide optimal information about the patient's perspective of treatment benefit at the time of product approval. A PRO is a measurement of any aspect of a patient's health status that comes directly from the patient (i.e., without the interpretation of the patient's responses by a physician or anyone else). In clinical trials, a PRO instrument can be used to measure the impact of an intervention on one or more aspects of patients' health status, hereafter referred to as PRO concepts, ranging from the purely symptomatic (response of a headache) to more complex concepts (e.g., ability to carry out activities of daily living), to extremely complex concepts such as quality of life, which is widely understood to be a multidomain concept with physical, psychological, and social components. Data generated by a PRO instrument can provide evidence of a treatment benefit from the patient perspective. For this data to be meaningful, however, there should be evidence that the PRO instrument effectively measures the particular concept that is studied. Generally, findings measured by PRO instruments may be used to support claims in approved product labeling if the claims are derived from adequate and well-controlled investigations that use PRO instruments that reliably and validly measure the specific concepts at issue. The glossary defines many of the terms used in this guidance. In particular, the term instrument refers to the actual questions or items contained in a questionnaire or interview schedule along with all the additional information and documentation that supports the use of these items in producing a PRO measure (e.g., interviewer training and instructions, scoring and interpretation manual). The term conceptual framework refers to how items are grouped according to subconcepts or domains (e.g., the item walking without help may be grouped with another item, walking with difficulty, within the domain of ambulation, and ambulation may be further grouped into the concept of physical ability). FDA's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidance documents describe the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidance documents means that something is suggested or recommended but not required. First publication of the Draft Guidance by the Food and Drug Administration--February 2006. More... »

PAGES

79-79

Journal

TITLE

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSUE

1

VOLUME

4

Identifiers

URI

http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79

DIMENSIONS

https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1050813769

PUBMED

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17034633


Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/11", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Medical and Health Sciences", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/1117", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Public Health and Health Services", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Clinical Trials as Topic", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Data Interpretation, Statistical", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Drug Industry", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Guidelines as Topic", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Humans", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Pain Measurement", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Patient Satisfaction", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Product Labeling", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Psychometrics", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Quality of Life", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Surveys and Questionnaires", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Treatment Outcome", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "United States", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "United States Food and Drug Administration", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "author": [
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 2085, USA", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.414212.0", 
          "name": [
            "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 2085, USA"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, USA", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.414212.0", 
          "name": [
            "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, USA"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Drive, Rockville, MD 20850-430, USA", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/None", 
          "name": [
            "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Drive, Rockville, MD 20850-430, USA"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "datePublished": "2006-10-11", 
    "datePublishedReg": "2006-10-11", 
    "description": "This guidance describes how the FDA evaluates patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used as effectiveness endpoints in clinical trials. It also describes our current thinking on how sponsors can develop and use study results measured by PRO instruments to support claims in approved product labeling (see appendix point 1). It does not address the use of PRO instruments for purposes beyond evaluation of claims made about a drug or medical product in its labeling. By explicitly addressing the review issues identified in this guidance, sponsors can increase the efficiency of their endpoint discussions with the FDA during the product development process, streamline the FDA's review of PRO endpoint adequacy, and provide optimal information about the patient's perspective of treatment benefit at the time of product approval. A PRO is a measurement of any aspect of a patient's health status that comes directly from the patient (i.e., without the interpretation of the patient's responses by a physician or anyone else). In clinical trials, a PRO instrument can be used to measure the impact of an intervention on one or more aspects of patients' health status, hereafter referred to as PRO concepts, ranging from the purely symptomatic (response of a headache) to more complex concepts (e.g., ability to carry out activities of daily living), to extremely complex concepts such as quality of life, which is widely understood to be a multidomain concept with physical, psychological, and social components. Data generated by a PRO instrument can provide evidence of a treatment benefit from the patient perspective. For this data to be meaningful, however, there should be evidence that the PRO instrument effectively measures the particular concept that is studied. Generally, findings measured by PRO instruments may be used to support claims in approved product labeling if the claims are derived from adequate and well-controlled investigations that use PRO instruments that reliably and validly measure the specific concepts at issue. The glossary defines many of the terms used in this guidance. In particular, the term instrument refers to the actual questions or items contained in a questionnaire or interview schedule along with all the additional information and documentation that supports the use of these items in producing a PRO measure (e.g., interviewer training and instructions, scoring and interpretation manual). The term conceptual framework refers to how items are grouped according to subconcepts or domains (e.g., the item walking without help may be grouped with another item, walking with difficulty, within the domain of ambulation, and ambulation may be further grouped into the concept of physical ability). FDA's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidance documents describe the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidance documents means that something is suggested or recommended but not required. First publication of the Draft Guidance by the Food and Drug Administration--February 2006.", 
    "genre": "article", 
    "id": "sg:pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79", 
    "inLanguage": "en", 
    "isAccessibleForFree": true, 
    "isPartOf": [
      {
        "id": "sg:journal.1031326", 
        "issn": [
          "1477-7525"
        ], 
        "name": "Health and Quality of Life Outcomes", 
        "publisher": "Springer Nature", 
        "type": "Periodical"
      }, 
      {
        "issueNumber": "1", 
        "type": "PublicationIssue"
      }, 
      {
        "type": "PublicationVolume", 
        "volumeNumber": "4"
      }
    ], 
    "keywords": [
      "patients' health status", 
      "PRO instruments", 
      "health status", 
      "clinical trials", 
      "treatment benefit", 
      "patient's perspective", 
      "patient-reported outcome measures", 
      "patient-reported outcome instruments", 
      "quality of life", 
      "product labeling", 
      "effectiveness endpoint", 
      "PRO measures", 
      "outcome measures", 
      "outcome instruments", 
      "Drug Administration", 
      "draft guidance", 
      "guidance documents", 
      "PRO concepts", 
      "labeling claims", 
      "FDA review", 
      "interview schedule", 
      "FDA guidance documents", 
      "medical product development", 
      "trials", 
      "FDA", 
      "current thinking", 
      "agency's current thinking", 
      "evaluation of claims", 
      "status", 
      "product approval", 
      "study results", 
      "review", 
      "patients", 
      "review issues", 
      "medical products", 
      "administration", 
      "endpoint", 
      "labeling", 
      "drugs", 
      "evidence", 
      "intervention", 
      "additional information", 
      "guidance", 
      "questionnaire", 
      "benefits", 
      "approval", 
      "use", 
      "measures", 
      "items", 
      "optimal information", 
      "findings", 
      "food", 
      "recommendations", 
      "data", 
      "schedule", 
      "first publication", 
      "instrument", 
      "evaluation", 
      "more aspects", 
      "life", 
      "adequacy", 
      "statutory requirements", 
      "sponsors", 
      "documentation", 
      "purpose", 
      "aspects", 
      "pros", 
      "information", 
      "publications", 
      "quality", 
      "development", 
      "time", 
      "impact", 
      "investigation", 
      "actual questions", 
      "social components", 
      "perspective", 
      "results", 
      "claims", 
      "issues", 
      "questions", 
      "components", 
      "complex concept", 
      "measurements", 
      "discussion", 
      "responsibility", 
      "conceptual framework", 
      "products", 
      "concept", 
      "topic", 
      "terms", 
      "documents", 
      "domain", 
      "subconcepts", 
      "requirements", 
      "defines", 
      "process", 
      "development process", 
      "specific concepts", 
      "thinking", 
      "words", 
      "product development", 
      "efficiency", 
      "framework", 
      "industry", 
      "particular concept", 
      "product development process", 
      "endpoint discussions", 
      "PRO endpoint adequacy", 
      "endpoint adequacy", 
      "multidomain concept", 
      "glossary defines", 
      "term instrument", 
      "term conceptual framework", 
      "enforceable responsibilities", 
      "Agency guidance documents"
    ], 
    "name": "Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance", 
    "pagination": "79-79", 
    "productId": [
      {
        "name": "dimensions_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "pub.1050813769"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "doi", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "10.1186/1477-7525-4-79"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "pubmed_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "17034633"
        ]
      }
    ], 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79", 
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1050813769"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "articles", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2021-12-01T19:17", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20211201/entities/gbq_results/article/article_415.jsonl", 
    "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
    "url": "https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

243 TRIPLES      21 PREDICATES      156 URIs      148 LITERALS      21 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:pub.10.1186/1477-7525-4-79 schema:about N0cd875cb7071449dbfc2d2725c7c83dc
2 N18523d9b82184168b1eb2763e078413b
3 N208c94c061c144faa9bbf022f6363c29
4 N32c68c3ed8244afcbe666cd03f4d86b7
5 N37aa5b8f9fa347038735e589e9622428
6 N50becdb7b1c84fb0b0815e73f72614c3
7 N61e86f2bf4134524bd841a69e9641b2b
8 N7bc1075ee68542d5879bfd7f19c25709
9 N9ff5f13583e4472bbb0beb5a29012805
10 Nbcc0ff0d8a2d4694a6616bc7c4611ba9
11 Nbdb29de687c54287ac5be995d1de71a6
12 Nc54066ddb93e4024bfceb795b9b393de
13 Nd89a8496d366411fa7c4e793cd28a980
14 Nfa85d45a2f7e47e2ae75976e8c29493d
15 anzsrc-for:11
16 anzsrc-for:1117
17 schema:author Nde80566649ea49669d5e4e509d18e1e2
18 schema:datePublished 2006-10-11
19 schema:datePublishedReg 2006-10-11
20 schema:description This guidance describes how the FDA evaluates patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used as effectiveness endpoints in clinical trials. It also describes our current thinking on how sponsors can develop and use study results measured by PRO instruments to support claims in approved product labeling (see appendix point 1). It does not address the use of PRO instruments for purposes beyond evaluation of claims made about a drug or medical product in its labeling. By explicitly addressing the review issues identified in this guidance, sponsors can increase the efficiency of their endpoint discussions with the FDA during the product development process, streamline the FDA's review of PRO endpoint adequacy, and provide optimal information about the patient's perspective of treatment benefit at the time of product approval. A PRO is a measurement of any aspect of a patient's health status that comes directly from the patient (i.e., without the interpretation of the patient's responses by a physician or anyone else). In clinical trials, a PRO instrument can be used to measure the impact of an intervention on one or more aspects of patients' health status, hereafter referred to as PRO concepts, ranging from the purely symptomatic (response of a headache) to more complex concepts (e.g., ability to carry out activities of daily living), to extremely complex concepts such as quality of life, which is widely understood to be a multidomain concept with physical, psychological, and social components. Data generated by a PRO instrument can provide evidence of a treatment benefit from the patient perspective. For this data to be meaningful, however, there should be evidence that the PRO instrument effectively measures the particular concept that is studied. Generally, findings measured by PRO instruments may be used to support claims in approved product labeling if the claims are derived from adequate and well-controlled investigations that use PRO instruments that reliably and validly measure the specific concepts at issue. The glossary defines many of the terms used in this guidance. In particular, the term instrument refers to the actual questions or items contained in a questionnaire or interview schedule along with all the additional information and documentation that supports the use of these items in producing a PRO measure (e.g., interviewer training and instructions, scoring and interpretation manual). The term conceptual framework refers to how items are grouped according to subconcepts or domains (e.g., the item walking without help may be grouped with another item, walking with difficulty, within the domain of ambulation, and ambulation may be further grouped into the concept of physical ability). FDA's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidance documents describe the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidance documents means that something is suggested or recommended but not required. First publication of the Draft Guidance by the Food and Drug Administration--February 2006.
21 schema:genre article
22 schema:inLanguage en
23 schema:isAccessibleForFree true
24 schema:isPartOf N4f8df9f73755430385c7dbabb94d1582
25 N50be7bba8101439bb6a19859d4a49d98
26 sg:journal.1031326
27 schema:keywords Agency guidance documents
28 Drug Administration
29 FDA
30 FDA guidance documents
31 FDA review
32 PRO concepts
33 PRO endpoint adequacy
34 PRO instruments
35 PRO measures
36 actual questions
37 additional information
38 adequacy
39 administration
40 agency's current thinking
41 approval
42 aspects
43 benefits
44 claims
45 clinical trials
46 complex concept
47 components
48 concept
49 conceptual framework
50 current thinking
51 data
52 defines
53 development
54 development process
55 discussion
56 documentation
57 documents
58 domain
59 draft guidance
60 drugs
61 effectiveness endpoint
62 efficiency
63 endpoint
64 endpoint adequacy
65 endpoint discussions
66 enforceable responsibilities
67 evaluation
68 evaluation of claims
69 evidence
70 findings
71 first publication
72 food
73 framework
74 glossary defines
75 guidance
76 guidance documents
77 health status
78 impact
79 industry
80 information
81 instrument
82 intervention
83 interview schedule
84 investigation
85 issues
86 items
87 labeling
88 labeling claims
89 life
90 measurements
91 measures
92 medical product development
93 medical products
94 more aspects
95 multidomain concept
96 optimal information
97 outcome instruments
98 outcome measures
99 particular concept
100 patient's perspective
101 patient-reported outcome instruments
102 patient-reported outcome measures
103 patients
104 patients' health status
105 perspective
106 process
107 product approval
108 product development
109 product development process
110 product labeling
111 products
112 pros
113 publications
114 purpose
115 quality
116 quality of life
117 questionnaire
118 questions
119 recommendations
120 requirements
121 responsibility
122 results
123 review
124 review issues
125 schedule
126 social components
127 specific concepts
128 sponsors
129 status
130 statutory requirements
131 study results
132 subconcepts
133 term conceptual framework
134 term instrument
135 terms
136 thinking
137 time
138 topic
139 treatment benefit
140 trials
141 use
142 words
143 schema:name Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance
144 schema:pagination 79-79
145 schema:productId Nbc78616d1e4941acb6b8966be4a63626
146 Nc1c444c6f9144ffa936abb05f52a53a7
147 Ndbbafcca9b3447a59410832f84810835
148 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1050813769
149 https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79
150 schema:sdDatePublished 2021-12-01T19:17
151 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
152 schema:sdPublisher Ne917fa9eee964cf89dbc56eb81f754f0
153 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79
154 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
155 sgo:sdDataset articles
156 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
157 N0263ab82fb5b4eb39c5c2dff89134fda rdf:first N9dfd5f46d43a4010b73da5d8efbf304b
158 rdf:rest Nd55d2a3f71f24241828584275fd1a201
159 N0cd875cb7071449dbfc2d2725c7c83dc schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
160 schema:name Treatment Outcome
161 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
162 N18523d9b82184168b1eb2763e078413b schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
163 schema:name Humans
164 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
165 N208c94c061c144faa9bbf022f6363c29 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
166 schema:name Pain Measurement
167 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
168 N32c68c3ed8244afcbe666cd03f4d86b7 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
169 schema:name Data Interpretation, Statistical
170 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
171 N37aa5b8f9fa347038735e589e9622428 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
172 schema:name Clinical Trials as Topic
173 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
174 N4f8df9f73755430385c7dbabb94d1582 schema:issueNumber 1
175 rdf:type schema:PublicationIssue
176 N50be7bba8101439bb6a19859d4a49d98 schema:volumeNumber 4
177 rdf:type schema:PublicationVolume
178 N50becdb7b1c84fb0b0815e73f72614c3 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
179 schema:name United States
180 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
181 N61e86f2bf4134524bd841a69e9641b2b schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
182 schema:name Patient Satisfaction
183 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
184 N737edab33c574c9ebfa0e97321b54b07 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.414212.0
185 rdf:type schema:Person
186 N7bc1075ee68542d5879bfd7f19c25709 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
187 schema:name United States Food and Drug Administration
188 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
189 N9dfd5f46d43a4010b73da5d8efbf304b schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.414212.0
190 rdf:type schema:Person
191 N9ff5f13583e4472bbb0beb5a29012805 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
192 schema:name Quality of Life
193 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
194 Nbc78616d1e4941acb6b8966be4a63626 schema:name doi
195 schema:value 10.1186/1477-7525-4-79
196 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
197 Nbcc0ff0d8a2d4694a6616bc7c4611ba9 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
198 schema:name Surveys and Questionnaires
199 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
200 Nbdb29de687c54287ac5be995d1de71a6 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
201 schema:name Psychometrics
202 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
203 Nc1c444c6f9144ffa936abb05f52a53a7 schema:name dimensions_id
204 schema:value pub.1050813769
205 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
206 Nc54066ddb93e4024bfceb795b9b393de schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
207 schema:name Drug Industry
208 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
209 Ncce7f7e1f28a48a095170ee5c71410af schema:affiliation grid-institutes:None
210 rdf:type schema:Person
211 Nd55d2a3f71f24241828584275fd1a201 rdf:first Ncce7f7e1f28a48a095170ee5c71410af
212 rdf:rest rdf:nil
213 Nd89a8496d366411fa7c4e793cd28a980 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
214 schema:name Guidelines as Topic
215 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
216 Ndbbafcca9b3447a59410832f84810835 schema:name pubmed_id
217 schema:value 17034633
218 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
219 Nde80566649ea49669d5e4e509d18e1e2 rdf:first N737edab33c574c9ebfa0e97321b54b07
220 rdf:rest N0263ab82fb5b4eb39c5c2dff89134fda
221 Ne917fa9eee964cf89dbc56eb81f754f0 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
222 rdf:type schema:Organization
223 Nfa85d45a2f7e47e2ae75976e8c29493d schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
224 schema:name Product Labeling
225 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
226 anzsrc-for:11 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
227 schema:name Medical and Health Sciences
228 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
229 anzsrc-for:1117 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
230 schema:name Public Health and Health Services
231 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
232 sg:journal.1031326 schema:issn 1477-7525
233 schema:name Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
234 schema:publisher Springer Nature
235 rdf:type schema:Periodical
236 grid-institutes:None schema:alternateName U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Drive, Rockville, MD 20850-430, USA
237 schema:name U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Drive, Rockville, MD 20850-430, USA
238 rdf:type schema:Organization
239 grid-institutes:grid.414212.0 schema:alternateName U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, USA
240 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 2085, USA
241 schema:name U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, USA
242 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 2085, USA
243 rdf:type schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...