Crossmark

Patients’ and clinicians’ perspectives on item importance, scoring, and clinically meaningful differences for the Endometriosis Symptom Diary (ESD) and Endometriosis Impact Scale (EIS)

Crossref DOI link: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01579-7

Published Online: 2021-01-06

Published Print: 2021-12

Update policy: https://doi.org/10.1007/springer_crossmark_policy

Authors

Kitchen, Helen

Seitz, Christian

Trigg, Andrew

Aldhouse, Natalie

Willgoss, Thomas

Schmitz, Heinz

Gater, Adam

Gerlinger, Christoph

Haberland, Claudia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5533-1881
Funding

Funding for this research was provided by:

Bayer AG
License Information

Text and Data Mining valid from 2021-01-06

Version of Record valid from 2021-01-06
More Information

Article History

Received: 21 April 2020

Accepted: 24 September 2020

First Online: 6 January 2021

Ethics approval and consent to participate

: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by New England IRB #16-062; Meridian Health IRB# #201701052J; Baden Württemberg ethics committee #F-2016-072). All participants provided written informed consent.

: Not applicable.

: Helen Kitchen and Natalie Aldhouse are employees of DRG Abacus, a health economics and outcomes research company that consults with various pharmaceutical companies. At the time of his involvement Thomas Willgoss was an employee of DRG Abacus. Andrew Trigg and Adam Gater are employees of Adelphi Values, a health economics and outcomes research company that consults with various pharmaceutical companies. Claudia Haberland, Heinz Schmitz, Christoph Gerlinger, and Christian Seitz are employees of Bayer AG. Bayer AG has commissioned DRG Abacus and Adelphi Values to consult on PRO measurement for endometriosis.

Document is current

Any future updates will be listed below