title: [Patient-reported and patient-weighted outcomes in ophthalmology].
abstract: Considering patients' values and preferences in comparative effectiveness research (CER) is one of the main challenges in ophthalmology (value-based medicine). This article defines core terms in CER. The concept of patient-relevant (or patient-important) outcomes is distinguished from patient-reported outcomes (PRO) by means of examples in the field of ophthalmology. In order to be able to give a consistant recommendation if an intervention leads to conflicting results for different outcomes (trade-off), a ranking of outcomes will be necessary. Examples of studies in glaucoma patients are provided that demonstrate the possibilities of ranking of outcomes based on patient preferences.
authors.affiliation: Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, Köln, Deutschland. fueloep.scheibler@iqwig.de
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Scheibler
authors.forename: R P
authors.initials: RP
authors.lastname: Finger
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Grosselfinger
authors.forename: C-M
authors.initials: CM
authors.lastname: Dintsios
mesh_terms: D057186:Comparative Effectiveness Research; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis / Q000191:economics; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000191:economics; D005858:Germany; D005901:Glaucoma / Q000191:economics / Q000628:therapy; D006801:Humans; D009313:National Health Programs / Q000191:economics*; D009885:Ophthalmology / Q000191:economics*; D017060:Patient Satisfaction / Q000191:economics*; D011788:Quality of Life; D015895:Relative Value Scales