Asthma outcomes: quality of life.

Background: "Asthma-related quality of life" (QOL) refers to the perceived impact that asthma has on the patient's QOL.

Objective: National Institutes of Health institutes and other federal agencies convened an expert group to recommend standardized measures of the impact of asthma on QOL for use in future asthma clinical research.

Methods: We reviewed published documentation regarding the development and psychometric evaluation; clinical research use since 2000; and extent to which the content of each existing QOL instrument provides a unique, reliable, and valid assessment of the intended construct.

Mediators of asthma outcomes.

Background: Patient adherence, the level of asthma self-management skills, exposure to stress, and depression can have considerable influence on a wide range of asthma outcomes and thus are considered asthma outcome mediators.

Objective: National Institutes of Health institutes and other federal agencies convened an expert group to recommend standardized measures for 7 domains of asthma clinical research outcomes measures. Although the review of mediators of these outcomes was not within the scope of any specific outcome topic, a brief summary is presented so that researchers might consider potential mediators.

Asthma outcomes workshop: overview.

Background: Asthma clinical research will highly benefit from standardization of major outcomes in terms of definition and assessment methodology. This will permit useful comparisons across interventional or observational studies and will allow more effective data sharing.

Objective: National Institutes of Health (NIH) institutes and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality convened a workshop involving 7 expert subcommittees to propose which asthma outcomes should be assessed with standardized methodology in future asthma clinical research studies.

Comparative effectiveness research in lung diseases and sleep disorders: recommendations from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute workshop.

The Division of Lung Diseases of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) held a workshop to develop recommendations on topics, methodologies, and resources for comparative effectiveness research (CER) that will guide clinical decision making about available treatment options for lung diseases and sleep disorders. A multidisciplinary group of experts with experience in efficacy, effectiveness, implementation, and economic research identified (a) what types of studies the domain of CER in lung diseases and sleep disorders should include, (b) the criteria and process for setting priorities, and (c) current resources for and barriers to CER in lung diseases. Key recommendations were to (1) increase efforts to engage stakeholders in developing CER questions and study designs; (2) invest in further development of databases and other infrastructure, including efficient methods for data sharing; (3) make full use of a broad range of study designs; (4) increase the appropriate use of observational designs and the support of methodologic research; (5) ensure that committees that review CER grant applications include persons with appropriate perspective and expertise; and (6) further develop the workforce for CER by supporting training opportunities that focus on the methodologic and practical skills needed.