What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures?

被引:381
|
作者
Frost, Marlene H.
Reeve, Bryce B.
Liepa, Astra M.
Stauffer, Joseph W.
Hays, Ron D.
Sloan, Jeff A.
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Womens Canc Program, Rochester, MN USA
[2] NCI, Div Canc Control & Populat Sci, Outcomes Res Branch, Appl Res Program, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[3] Eli Lilly & Co, Global Hlth Outcomes, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA
[4] Alpharma, Global Med Affairs, Piscataway, NJ USA
[5] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Hlth Sci, Dept Med, UCLA Div Gen Internal Med & Hlth Ser Res, Los Angeles, CA USA
[6] RAND Corp, Santa Monica, CA USA
关键词
patient-reported outcomes; psychometric; validation;
D O I
10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00272.x
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This article focuses on the necessary psychometric properties of a patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measure. Topics include the importance of reliability and validity, psychometric approaches used to provide reliability and validity estimates, the kinds of evidence needed to indicate that a PRO has a sufficient level of reliability and validity, contexts that may affect psychometric properties, methods available to evaluate PRO instruments when the context varies, and types of reliability and validity testing that are appropriate during different phases of clinical trials. Points discussed include the perspective that the psychometric properties of reliability and validity are on a continuum in which the more evidence one has, the greater confidence there is in the value of the PRO data. Construct validity is the type of validity most frequently used with PRO instruments as few "gold standards" exist to allow the use of criterion validity and content validity by itself only provides beginning evidence of validity. Several guidelines are recommended for establishing sufficient evidence of reliability and validity. For clinical trials, a minimum reliability threshold of 0.70 is recommended. Sample sizes for testing should include at least 200 cases and results should be replicated in at least one additional sample. At least one full report on the development of the instrument and one on the use of the instrument are deemed necessary to evaluate the PRO psychometric properties. Psychometric testing ideally occurs before the initiation of Phase III trials. When testing does not occur prior to a Phase III trial, considerable risk is posed in relation to the ability to substantiate the use of the PRO data. Various qualitative (e.g., focus groups, behavioral coding, cognitive interviews) and quantitative approaches (e.g., differential item functioning testing) are useful in evaluating the reliability and validity of PRO instruments.
引用
收藏
页码:S94 / S105
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Content validity of patient-reported outcome measures for patients with chronic pain: considering the patient's perspective
    Hickey, Michael
    Barry, Daniel
    Redito, John
    Anand, Natasha
    Bianchi, Nancy
    Reneman, Michiel
    Escorpizo, Reuben
    PAIN, 2023, 164 (02) : 252 - 257
  • [22] Understanding patient-reported outcome measures in Huntington disease: at what point is cognitive impairment related to poor measurement reliability?
    N. E. Carlozzi
    S. Schilling
    A. L. Kratz
    J. S. Paulsen
    S. Frank
    J. C. Stout
    Quality of Life Research, 2018, 27 : 2541 - 2555
  • [23] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Suitable to Assessment of Patient Navigation
    Fiscella, Kevin
    Ransom, Sean
    Jean-Pierre, Pascal
    Cella, David
    Stein, Kevin
    Bauer, Joseph E.
    Crane-Okada, Rebecca
    Gentry, Sharon
    Canosa, Rosalie
    Smith, Tenbroeck
    Sellers, Jean
    Jankowski, Emilia
    Walsh, Karyn
    CANCER, 2011, 117 (15) : 3603 - 3617
  • [24] A patient-centred approach to measuring quality in kidney care: patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures
    Aiyegbusi, Olalekan L.
    Kyte, Derek
    Cockwell, Paul
    Anderson, Nicola
    Calvert, Melanie
    CURRENT OPINION IN NEPHROLOGY AND HYPERTENSION, 2017, 26 (06) : 442 - 449
  • [25] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures-What Data Do We Really Need?
    Lyman, Stephen
    Hidaka, Chisa
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2016, 31 (06) : 1144 - 1147
  • [26] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Food and Drug Allergy
    Anagnostou, Aikaterini
    Warren, Christopher
    Dantzer, Jennifer
    Galvin, Audrey Dunn
    Phillips, Elizabeth J.
    Khan, David A.
    Banerji, Aleena
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY-IN PRACTICE, 2024, 12 (10) : 2591 - 2598
  • [27] Preferences of Individuals With Cancer for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures
    Whisenant, Meagan S.
    Bamidele, Oluwatosin
    Cleeland, Charles
    Williams, Loretta A.
    ONCOLOGY NURSING FORUM, 2021, 48 (02) : 173 - 183
  • [28] Outcome Measures and Patient-Reported Metrics in Cancer Rehabilitation
    Vargo, Mary M.
    CURRENT ONCOLOGY REPORTS, 2023, 25 (08) : 869 - 882
  • [29] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Swallowing: A Proposed Checklist
    Shapira-Galitz, Yael
    Anderson, Amber
    Balou, Matina
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY, 2024, 33 (05) : 2167 - 2176
  • [30] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Their Clinical Applications in Dermatology
    Snyder, Ashley M.
    Chen, Suephy C.
    Chren, Mary-Margaret
    Ferris, Laura K.
    Edwards, LaVar D.
    Swerlick, Robert A.
    Flint, Nicholas D.
    Cizik, Amy M.
    Hess, Rachel
    Kean, Jacob
    Secrest, Aaron M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL DERMATOLOGY, 2023, 24 (04) : 499 - 511