Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot 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 descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer review identified the following strengths and limitations in the report:

  • The reviewers thought that the report was very strong, but they added that the researchers needed to improve how they connected the study objectives and the presentation of results. The researchers revised the report accordingly and added a discussion of the relevance of the study in light of current health policy and healthcare service practices related to shared decision making.
  • The reviewers asked the researchers to consider reporting information about the group of survey respondents who did not finish the survey or who had invalid surveys. Reviewers asked for this information to address their concerns about possible systematic differences between those who provided valid surveys and those who did not. The researchers pointed out that they did not consider the demographic data from invalid surveys to be reliable. Therefore, they felt that comparing participants with valid and invalid responses would lead to misinformation about selection bias.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Project Information

Susan dosReis, BSPharm, PhD
University of Maryland, Baltimore
$1,032,266
10.25302/10.2019.ME.130601511
Methods for Prioritizing Surrogate Desired Health Outcomes for Patients

Key Dates

December 2013
September 2018
2013
2018

Study Registration Information

Tags

Has Results
Award Type
Health Conditions Health Conditions These are the broad terms we use to categorize our funded research studies; specific diseases or conditions are included within the appropriate larger category. Note: not all of our funded projects focus on a single disease or condition; some touch on multiple diseases or conditions, research methods, or broader health system interventions. Such projects won’t be listed by a primary disease/condition and so won’t appear if you use this filter tool to find them. View Glossary
State State The state where the project originates, or where the primary institution or organization is located. View Glossary
Last updated: March 4, 2022