The development, assessment, and selection of questionnaires

被引:313
作者
Pesudovs, Konrad [1 ]
Burr, Jennifer M.
Harley, Clare
Elliott, David B.
机构
[1] Flinders Med Ctr, Dept Ophthalmol, NH&MRC, Ctr Clin Eye Res, Bedford Pk, SA 5042, Australia
[2] Flinders Univ S Australia, Bedford Pk, SA 5042, Australia
[3] Univ Aberdeen, Hlth Serv Res Unit, Aberdeen, Scotland
[4] Univ Bradford, Dept Optometry, Bradford BD7 1DP, W Yorkshire, England
关键词
factor analysis; instrument; quality assessment; quality of life; questionnaire; Rasch analysis; reliability; responsiveness; validity; visual disability; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; INTRACLASS CORRELATION-COEFFICIENT; INSTITUTE-REFRACTIVE ERROR; VISION IMPAIRMENT QUESTIONNAIRE; VISUAL DISABILITY VARIABLES; PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES; RASCH ANALYSIS; SCALE; IMPACT; AGREEMENT;
D O I
10.1097/OPX.0b013e318141fe75
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Patient-reported outcome measurement has become accepted as an important component of comprehensive outcomes research. Researchers wishing to use a patient-reported measure must either develop their own questionnaire (called an instrument in the research literature) or choose from the myriad of instruments previously reported. This article summarizes how previously developed instruments are best assessed using a systematic process and we propose a system of quality assessment so that clinicians and researchers can determine whether there exists an appropriately developed and validated instrument that matches their particular needs. These quality assessment criteria may also be useful to guide new instrument development and refinement. We welcome debate over the appropriateness of these criteria as this will lead to the evolution of better quality assessment criteria and in turn better assessment of patient-reported outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:663 / 674
页数:12
相关论文
共 71 条
[1]   RATING FORMULATION FOR ORDERED RESPONSE CATEGORIES [J].
ANDRICH, D .
PSYCHOMETRIKA, 1978, 43 (04) :561-573
[2]   A NOTE ON THE USE OF THE INTRACLASS CORRELATION-COEFFICIENT IN THE EVALUATION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN 2 METHODS OF MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
COMPUTERS IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 1990, 20 (05) :337-340
[3]  
Bland JM, 1999, STAT METHODS MED RES, V8, P135, DOI 10.1177/096228029900800204
[4]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[5]  
Bond T., 2007, Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences
[6]   ESTIMATING THE RELIABILITY OF CONTINUOUS MEASURES WITH CRONBACH ALPHA OR THE INTRACLASS CORRELATION-COEFFICIENT - TOWARD THE INTEGRATION OF 2 TRADITIONS [J].
BRAVO, G ;
POTVIN, L .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1991, 44 (4-5) :381-390
[7]   How a well-grounded minimal important difference can enhance transparency of labelling claims and improve interpretation of a patient reported outcome measure [J].
Brozek, Jan L. ;
Guyatt, Gordon H. ;
Schuenemann, Holger J. .
HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2006, 4 (1)
[8]   The eye sensation scale: an ophthalmic pain severity measure [J].
Caudle, Lynda E. ;
Willmms, Keryn A. ;
Pesudovs, Konrad .
OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2007, 84 (08) :752-762
[9]   Development of a scale to measure the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: lessons learned and the road ahead [J].
Day, H ;
Jutai, J ;
Campbell, KA .
DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION, 2002, 24 (1-3) :31-37
[10]  
Day H, 2001, DISABIL REHABIL, V23, P400