Results Summary and Professional Abstract
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also confirms that the research has followed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts who were not members of the research team read a draft report of the research. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. Reviewers do not have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve how the research team analyzed its results or reported its conclusions. Learn more about PCORI’s peer-review process here.
In response to peer review, the PI made changes including
- Indicating that the patient preference instrument was developed based on data collected from a diverse group of patients in a prior substudy. That substudy identified unmet healthcare needs, factors that were most important to patients, and patients’ willingness to use alternative communication methods (e.g., automated calls or email).
- Providing details about the intervention that was being tested, the outcome measures, the analytic plans, and how they involved the patient stakeholder panel in study development and execution.
- Describing the purpose and execution of the added physician survey. The PI responded to reviewers’ concerns about the very low survey completion rate (31 of 186 physicians) by noting that this was a convenience sample recruited for this late addition to the study.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
View the COI disclosure form.