Refinement of the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ): patient and expert stakeholder opinion

被引:9
作者
Kelly, Laura [1 ]
Potter, Caroline M. [1 ]
Hunter, Cheryl [2 ]
Gibbons, Elizabeth [1 ]
Fitzpatrick, Ray [1 ]
Jenkinson, Crispin [1 ]
Peters, Michele [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Populat Hlth, Hlth Serv Res Unit, Oxford, England
[2] Univ Leeds, Acad Unit Primary Care, Leeds Inst Hlth Sci, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
来源
PATIENT-RELATED OUTCOME MEASURES | 2016年 / 7卷
关键词
long-term conditions; chronic conditions; cognitive debrief interviews; patient-reported;
D O I
10.2147/PROM.S116987
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose: It is a key UK government priority to assess and improve outcomes in people with long-term conditions (LTCs). We are developing a new patient-reported outcome measure, the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ), for use among people with single or multiple LTCs. This study aimed to refine candidate LTCQ items that had previously been informed through literature reviews, interviews with professional stakeholders, and interviews with people with LTCs. Materials and methods: Cognitive interviews (n=32) with people living with LTCs and consultations with professional stakeholders (n=13) and public representatives (n=5) were conducted to assess the suitability of 23 candidate items. Items were tested for content and comprehensibility and underwent a translatability assessment. Results: Four rounds of revisions took place, due to amendments to item structure, improvements to item clarity, item duplication, and recommendations for future translations. Twenty items were confirmed as relevant to living with LTCs and understandable to patients and professionals. Conclusion: This study supports the content validity of the LTCQ items among people with LTCs and professional stakeholders. The final items are suitable to enter the next stage of psychometric refinement.
引用
收藏
页码:183 / 193
页数:11
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2009, GUID IND PAT REP OUT
  • [2] Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study
    Barnett, Karen
    Mercer, Stewart W.
    Norbury, Michael
    Watt, Graham
    Wyke, Sally
    Guthrie, Bruce
    [J]. LANCET, 2012, 380 (9836) : 37 - 43
  • [3] Research synthesis: The practice of cognitive interviewing
    Beatty, Paul C.
    Willis, Gordon B.
    [J]. PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2007, 71 (02) : 287 - 311
  • [4] The Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework (CIRF) Towards the Harmonization of Cognitive Testing Reports
    Boeije, Hennie
    Willis, Gordon
    [J]. METHODOLOGY-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RESEARCH METHODS FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2013, 9 (03) : 87 - 95
  • [5] Bowling A, 2005, MEASURING HLTH REV Q
  • [6] Interviewing to develop Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) measures for clinical research: eliciting patients' experience
    Bredart, Anne
    Marrel, Alexia
    Abetz-Webb, Linda
    Lasch, Kathy
    Acquadro, Catherine
    [J]. HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2014, 12
  • [7] Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience
    Brod, Meryl
    Tesler, Laura E.
    Christensen, Torsten L.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2009, 18 (09) : 1263 - 1278
  • [8] Department of Health, 2013, AD SOC CAR OUTC FRAM
  • [9] Department of Health, 2005, SUPP PEOPL LONG TERM
  • [10] Department of Health, 2013, NHS OUTC FRAM 2014 1