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
  • [41] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Rhinitis and Chronic Rhinosinusitis
    Dykewicz, Mark S.
    Wallace, Dana V.
    Bandi, Sindhura
    Mahdavinia, Mahboobeh
    Sedaghat, Ahmad R.
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY-IN PRACTICE, 2024, 12 (10) : 2574 - 2582
  • [42] Patient-reported outcome measures for patients with nail conditions: a systematic review of the psychometric evidence
    Kamran, Rakhshan
    Algu, Leah
    Leveille, Cameron F.
    Stewart, Claire R.
    Abid, Khizar
    Lipner, Shari R.
    Klassen, Anne F.
    Rae, Charlene
    ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2022, 314 (03) : 223 - 237
  • [43] DENTAL PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES ARE ESSENTIAL FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
    Reissmann, Daniel R.
    JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED DENTAL PRACTICE, 2019, 19 (01) : 1 - 6
  • [44] A review of patient-reported outcome measures to assess female infertility-related quality of life
    Helen Kitchen
    Natalie Aldhouse
    Andrew Trigg
    Roberto Palencia
    Stephen Mitchell
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 15
  • [45] A review of patient-reported outcome measures to assess female infertility-related quality of life
    Kitchen, Helen
    Aldhouse, Natalie
    Trigg, Andrew
    Palencia, Roberto
    Mitchell, Stephen
    HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2017, 15
  • [46] Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures: a scoping review
    Wiering, Bianca
    de Boer, Dolf
    Delnoij, Diana
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2017, 20 (01) : 11 - 23
  • [47] Acceptability and Content Validity of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Considered From the Perspective of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis
    Shaw, Yomei
    Zhang, Chen
    Bradley, Matthew
    Simon, Teresa A.
    Schumacher, Rebecca
    McDonald, David
    Michaud, Kaleb
    ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2021, 73 (04) : 510 - 519
  • [48] Qualitative study of patients with venous malformations: symptom experiences and content validity of patient-reported outcome measures
    England, Ryan W.
    Bailey, Christopher R.
    Anatchkova, Milena D.
    Skalicky, Anne M.
    Meissner, Mark H.
    Rosenblatt, Melvin
    Gelhorn, Heather L.
    Weiss, Clifford R.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2020, 29 (06) : 1707 - 1719
  • [49] Constructing arguments for the interpretation and use of patient-reported outcome measures in research: an application of modern validity theory
    Weinfurt, Kevin P.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2021, 30 (06) : 1715 - 1722
  • [50] Patient engagement in multimorbidity: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures
    Barello, Serena
    Anderson, Gloria
    Bosio, Caterina
    Lane, Deirdre A.
    Leo, Donato G.
    Lobban, Trudie C. A.
    Trevisan, Caterina
    Graffigna, Guendalina
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2024, 15