Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 221

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patient-Reported Outcomes: Conceptual Issues

Open access
Rothman, Margaret L., Beltran, Philippe, Cappelleri, Joseph C., Lipscomb, Joseph, Teschendorf, Bonnie·2007·Value in Health
DOI 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00269.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00269.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. McColl, 2003, Cognitive aspects of survey methodology and quality of life assessment, Qual Life Res, 12, 217, 10.1023/A:1023233432721 · DOI
  2. Acquadro, 2003, Incorporating the patient's perspective into drug development and communication: an Ad Hoc Task Force report on the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Harmonization Group Meeting at the Food and Drug Administration, February 16, 2001, Value Health, 5, 522, 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.65309.x · DOI · Paper page
  3. Sullivan, 2003, The new subjective medicine: taking the patient's point of view on health care and health, Soc Sci Med, 56, 1595, 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00159-4 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Lohr, 2002, Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria, Qual Life Res, 11, 193, 10.1023/A:1015291021312 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Gill, 1994, A critical appraisal of the quality of quality-of-life measurements, JAMA, 272, 19, 10.1001/jama.1994.03520080061045 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Leplege, 1997, The problem of quality of life in medicine, JAMA, 278, 47, 10.1001/jama.1997.03550010061041 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Fayers, 1997, Factor analysis, causal indicators and quality of life, Quality Life Res, 6, 139
  8. Fayers, 2002, Causal variables, indicator variables and measurement scales: an example from quality of life, J Royal Stat Soc––Series A, 165, 233, 10.1111/1467-985X.02020 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Lohr, 1996, Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria, Clin Ther, 18, 979, 10.1016/S0149-2918(96)80054-3 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Scott JA. Using patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to measure study endpoints. Presented at the QOL Assessment in Symptom Management Trials Workshop, sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Community Clinical Oncology Program, Rockville, MD, October 24–25, 2005.
  11. Cleeland, 1996, Dimensions of the impact of cancer pain in a four country sample: new information from multidimensional scaling, Pain, 67, 267, 10.1016/0304-3959(96)03131-4 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Roila, 2001, Quality of life as a primary end point in oncology, Ann Oncology, 12, S3, 10.1093/annonc/12.suppl_3.S3 · DOI
  13. Hays, 2005, Application of structural equation modeling for health outcomes research, Eval Health Prof, 28, 295, 10.1177/0163278705278277 · DOI

Cited by

See all 221

Metadata

Authors
Rothman, M. L., Beltran, P., Cappelleri, J. C., Lipscomb, J., & Teschendorf, B.
Venue
Value in Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-11
Volume
10
Pages
S66-S75
ISSN
1098-3015 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00269.x
OpenAlex
W2151299853
Cited by
221
References
1
FWCI
31.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patient-Reported Outcomes: Conceptual Issues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00269.x
The paper
Rothman, M. L., Beltran, P., Cappelleri, J. C., Lipscomb, J., & Teschendorf, B. (2007). Patient-Reported Outcomes: Conceptual Issues. Value in Health. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00269.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.