- The PCORI Strategic Plan
- Clinical Effectiveness and Decision Science
- Dissemination and Implementation
- Evaluation and Analysis
- Healthcare Delivery and Disparities Research
- Research Infrastructure
- Our Vision & Mission
- Financial Statements and Reports
- The PCORI Strategic Plan
- Board of Governors
- Methodology Committee
- Authorizing Law
Evaluating Our Work
- PCORI's Goals (2013)
- Planning Our Organizational Learning, Reporting Our Results
- Evaluating Key Aspects of Our Work
- PCORI Evaluation Group (PEG)
- PCORI's Advisory Panels
- Procurement Opportunities
- Stakeholder Views on Components of 'Patient-Centered Value' in Health and Health Care: A Request for Input
Past Opportunities to Provide Input
- PCORI's Proposed Research Agenda (2021-2022)
- Proposed National Priorities for Health (2021)
- Proposed Principles for the Consideration of the Full Range of Outcomes Data in PCORI-Funded Research (2020)
- Proposed New PCORI Methodology Standards (2018)
- Data Access and Data Sharing Policy: Public Comment (2017)
- Proposed New PCORI Methodology Standards (2017)
Comment on the Proposed New and Revised PCORI Methodology Standards (2016)
- 1. Standards for Formulating Research Questions
- 10: Standards for Studies of Diagnostic Tests
- 12. Standards on Research Designs Using Clusters
- 13: General Comments on the Proposed Revisions to the PCORI Methodology Standards
- 2: Standards Associated with Patient-Centeredness
- 3: Standards for Data Integrity and Rigorous Analysis
- 4: Standards for Preventing and Handling Missing Data
- 5: Standards for Heterogeneity of Treatment Effects
- 6: Standards for Data Registries
- 7: Standards for Data Networks as Research-Facilitating Structures
- 8. Standards for Causal Inference Methods
- 9. Standards for Adaptive Trial Designs
- Peer-Review Process Comments (2014)
- Draft Methodology Report Public Comment Period (2012)
- Executive Team
- Office of the Executive Director
- Program Support and Information Management
- Staff Conflict of Interest Disclosures
I spent this past Friday and Saturday with folks at the biennial meeting of the Immune Deficiency Foundation (IDF) in New Orleans, which drew more than 1,300 patients and family members, interested clinicians, and pharmaceutical industry sponsors. Along with a few other parents and interested physicians, founder and current president Marcia Boyle and her husband John launched IDF 35 years ago after their son, John, was diagnosed with an immunodeficiency disorder. An immunodeficiency disorder occurs when part of the body’s immune system is missing or functions improperly, resulting in an increased vulnerability to infections.
Today, this remarkable organization provides educational and support services for patients with one of more than 250 conditions classified as primary immunodeficiencies via a remarkably informative website and a variety of events and materials. Educational services for physicians are a big focus as well.
IDF has developed and makes available an electronic personal health record (ePHR) that is currently used by more than 1,600 patients. The ePHR (www.idfephr.org) allows persons with immune deficiency disorders to store their clinical information securely and efficiently so that it’s always at hand when seeing a new clinician or in an emergency. That’s impressive. But something even more exciting is going on.
When an individual signs up for the ePHR, he or she also is invited to join PI Connect, one of the 18 Patient-Powered Research Networks (PPRNs) funded by PCORI as part of PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. About two-thirds of the ePHR users accept this invitation, which lets them share their electronic data with researchers and other patients for the purposes of participating in research that they themselves help to plan and conduct.
PPRNs are based on the premise that patients, their caregivers, and their clinicians often have research questions that have not been studied, and that PCORnet is an infrastructure well-suited to addressing these practical, real-world questions. PI Connect links interested patients with primary immunodeficiency disorders to raise those research questions, see the questions asked by others, and participate in planning and conducting research.
What patient-driven research looks like
In one memorable session at the IDF meeting titled PI Connect Live!, I saw this concept in action. Dr. Kate Sullivan, principal investigator of PI Connect, along with several of its patient and clinician leaders, met with nearly 100 PI patients and family members. Four questions that had been discussed extensively by patients on PI Connect were considered in depth, with presentations summarizing the online dialog, comments by an immunologist, and open discussion. The questions were:
- Possible new uses of stem cell transplants, especially in the context of common variable immunodeficiency in adults: what are the risks and benefits, and who is more likely to benefit?
- Alternative methods of delivery of immunoglobulins – intravenous and subcutaneous administration are the typical approaches. Both appear to be effective, but individual patients differ, especially in terms of preferences. In special situations, oral or topical administration may also be of benefit. When and for whom is not well known.
- Recognizing fever in patients with PI – patients online had noted that they often run a “normal” temperature that is one to two degrees below 98.6. So when an infection occurs, their temperatures may rise, but only to 98-99, causing clinicians to dismiss the idea that their symptoms are infection-related. When asked, 80 percent of the patients in the room agreed they had lower body temperatures, and that this had been a problem for them when interacting with physicians. Amazingly, the clinician specialists hadn’t heard this before and agreed that if this could be demonstrated, it would be very important to publish and disseminate. Those in the room then began designing a study that could be conducted within PI Connect and might settle this important question.
- The role of antibiotics to prevent infections in patients with immunodeficiencies was also of great interest. When are they helpful? If used, should they be rotated to avoid development of resistant organisms? The clinicians agreed that the answers to these questions were not known for most conditions and, in fact, variation in practices was apparent among the physicians in the room.
Research questions were flying around the room for more than an hour. Most, though not all, were comparative effectiveness questions like those PCORI was established to help answer. We left convinced by what we’d seen and heard that patients who live the experience of an illness do indeed encounter questions unappreciated by others that deserve to be studied.
So I congratulate the IDF, its leadership, and all of its members. I was inspired by the sense of family and community I witnessed and by the keen interest of patients in contributing to research – for themselves and for future patients. I know that there are many patient organizations like the IDF and am grateful that PCORI gets to join with so many of them in supporting patient-centered outcomes research.
July 14, 2015, 12:53 PM
Comment by PCORI,
Dear Ms. DeCarolis, Thank you for your comment. On the Research & Results section of our website (http://www.pcori.org/research-results), you can find listings of PCORI-funded projects in and around your state. Once you find a project that interests you, you can then reach out directly to the Principal Investigators of those projects for additional information. You may also be interested in our Pipeline to Proposal awards. We designed these awards to support the development of new teams and projects engaging patients and other stakeholders around patient-centered outcomes research. Alternatively, you might be interested in becoming a PCORI Merit Reviewer (http://www.pcori.org/reviewers) as we rely on the diverse perspectives of patients, caregivers, clinicians, policymakers etc. to identify high-quality, patient-centered comparative clinical effectiveness research. If you are interested, please reach out to Kirstin Margosian at [email protected] or Kimberly Bailey at [email protected] for more information.
July 10, 2015, 7:32 PM
Comment by Carolyn Larsen,
This was the session I learned the most in. Especially the fact that you sought me out to talk to . I am going to Duke university on the 20th of this month. Thank you. God bless you. Carolyn
July 10, 2015, 7:10 PM
Comment by Diane DeCarolis,
Please tell me who I can contact to look and possibly become involved in the clinical trials that are currently underway. As a nurse practitioner and a patient I am very interested at getting involved.
Thank you very much!
July 2, 2015, 8:28 PM
Comment by Marcia Boyle,
Thank you for participating and inspiring us, our community is so excited about the promise of PI Connect!
July 2, 2015, 1:22 PM
Comment by Steve Fietek,
Joe, It was a pleasure to have you join us at our conference. I enjoyed your presentation and I am excited about the partnership between our organizations.
June 30, 2015, 4:39 PM
Comment by John G. Boyle,
It was great having you join us, Dr. Selby!
Add new Comment
What's Happening at PCORI?
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute sends weekly emails about opportunities to apply for funding, newly funded research studies and engagement projects, results of our funded research, webinars, and other new information posted on our site.