Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2025 article

Assessing participants’ experiences with the COVID-19 symptom diary in a clinical trial

1Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
2Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

During a phase 2/3 study of twice-daily nirmatrelvir 300 mg coadministered with ritonavir 100 mg versus placebo for 5 days (NCT05011513), participants reported presence and severity of COVID-19 symptoms using a COVID-19 symptom diary in accordance with FDA guidance. Here, we aimed to evaluate the content validity of the COVID-19 symptom diary and global impression items through qualitative interviews as recommended by the FDA. Study participants kept a daily electronic diary to record the presence and severity of 14 COVID-19 symptoms (stuffy or runny nose, sore throat, shortness of breath, cough, low energy or tiredness, muscle or body aches, headache, chills/shivering, feeling hot or feverish, nausea, frequency of vomiting, frequency of diarrhea, sense of smell, and sense of taste). They also answered questions regarding 3 global impression items (return to health, return to usual activities, and overall symptom severity). A subset of clinical trial participants was interviewed at study completion to assess content validity of the diary. Overall, 25 participants were interviewed across 10 clinical sites. Each of the 14 symptoms included in the diary were reported by ≥ 1 participant, with low energy/tiredness being reported most frequently (88.0%). Twelve participants (48.0%) reported ≥ 1 symptom that was not captured by the diary, with dizziness being the most common (12.0%). Rates of these symptoms were lower (≤ 12.0%) than the 14 prespecified symptoms included in the diary (16.0-88.0%). Based on participant feedback, all 14 diary items were clear and generally easy to answer using the response scales, and all were interpreted as intended. The 3 global items received similar feedback, although a few participants noted that there were challenges in interpreting the items, describing questions as "vague" and "confusing", or that responses were too limited; one-third reported having difficulty calculating overall symptom experience for multiple symptoms. Participants reported that the electronic application for the diary and global items was easy to use and enabled the items to be easily completed. Exit interview results support the content validity of the COVID-19 symptom diary and global impression items, with the 14 symptoms included in the diary reflecting the most commonly experienced COVID-19 symptoms. NCT05011513; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05011513 .

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Assessing participants’ experiences with the COVID-19 symptom diary in a clinical trial
Date Crossref
11/08/2025
Éditeur
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Où se fait cette recherche

  • RTI Health Solutions pays non établi dans la notice
    Organisation à but non lucratif
  • Pfizer (United States) pays non établi dans la notice
    Entreprise
  • Pfizer Inc Global Access & Value pays non établi dans la notice
    Entreprise

RTI Health Solutions, Pfizer (United States) et Global Access & Value — Pfizer Inc.

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

COVID-19 and Mental HealthLong-Term Effects of COVID-19Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.