Glossaries

A brief description intended for the lay public in easily understood language. NOTE: Public title may also be referred to as "brief title." [Segen's Medical Dictionary] See also protocol title, official protocol title.

The science of assessing the measurement characteristics of scales that assess human psychological characteristics.

The specialized process of validating questionnaires used in outcomes research to show that they measure what they purport to measure. NOTE: Several types of validity are distinguished. For example, [Guyatt et al., 1993; DIA ePRO Workgroup] See also validation; compare to psychometric reliability.

The degree to which a psychometric 'instrument' is free from random error either by testing the homogeneity of content on multi-item tests with internal consistency evaluation or testing the degree to which the instrument yields stable scores over time. NOTE: Reliability pertains to questions concerning whether an instrument is accurate, repeatable, and sensitive. Reliability is distinguished from validation, which answers whether the instrument (e.g., questionnaire) actually measure the selected "construct" (latent variable). For example a balance (scale) is easily understood as a possibly valid instrument to measure body weight. Its reliability would be assessed by measuring the sensitivity, repeatability, and accuracy of the balance. The validity of using the balance for a particular purpose could then be established by comparing the measured reliability to the reliability required for that purpose. [After Patrick, D.L., 2003] Compare to psychometric validation. See also validation, instrument.

A privacy preservation technique that both replaces the direct association with a data subject and adds an association between a particular set of characteristics relating to the data subject and one or more pseudonyms. Typically, psuedonymization is implemented by replacing direct identifiers (like the subject's name) with a pseudonym such as a randomly generated value. [ISO/TS 25237:2008]

A measurement based on a report by someone other than the patient reporting as if he or she is the patient. NOTE: A proxy-reported outcome is not a patient-reported outcome (PRO). FDA does not consider a proxy-reported outcome as a valid endpoint. [After FDA Clinical Outcome Assessment (COA) Glossary]

Someone other than the patient who is responding about the patient on behalf of the patient, not as an observer. [Patrick, D.L., 2003; DIA ePRO Workgroup] Compare to observer assessment.

A proposed standardized qualifier variable to describe the origin of observations of the Findings class resulting from outcomes measures. Proxy describes outcome data furnished by someone other than the patient and distinguishes the origin of the outcome from a self-report (PRO) directly from the patient. NOTE: The term proxy helps qualify outcomes measures that record feelings and symptoms reported by the patient but not recorded directly. [CDISC (extension of SDTM based on Table 2 Patrick, D.L., 2003)] See also observer assessment.

A significant departure from processes or procedures that were required by the protocol. Violations often result in data that are not deemed evaluable for a per-protocol analysis, and may require that the subject(s) who violate the protocol be discontinued from the study. Compare to protocol deviation.

The name of a study protocol. NOTE: In most cases the protocol title is the same as the study title but in certain cases the titles may be different. See also official protocol title, public protocol title, master protocol.

Documents that optionally supplement the ICH GCP recommended sections of a protocol giving background information and rationale for the trial. [After ICH E6 1.44] See also protocol.

Any of one or more unique codes that refers to a specific protocol. NOTE: There may be multiple numbers (National number, coop group number). [EudraCT]

A variation from processes or procedures defined in a protocol. Deviations usually do not preclude the overall evaluability of subject data for either efficacy or safety, and are often acknowledged and accepted in advance by the sponsor. NOTE: Good clinical practice recommends that deviations be summarized by site and by category as part of the report of study results so that the possible importance of the deviations to the findings of the study can be assessed. Compare to protocol violation. [See ICH E3]

Sponsor action at the completion of protocol development that is marked when the signature of the last reviewer on the protocol approval form has been obtained, signifying that all reviewer changes to the protocol have been incorporated. NOTE: Approval by the sponsor usually initiates secondary approvals by IRBs, regulatory authorities, and sites. Protocol amendments usually also require a cycle of approval by sponsor and study staff prior to taking effect.

A written description of a change(s) to or formal clarification of a protocol. NOTE: If a protocol modification is substantial, it may require notification to the regulatory authority. For example, substantial impacts on the safety or rights of the subjects or on the reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial. [ICH E3; ICH E6 (R2) Glossary 1.45]