The role of response domain and scale label in the quantitative interpretation of patient-reported outcome measure response options

被引:4
|
作者
Peasgood, Tessa [1 ,2 ]
Chang, Jen-Yu [1 ]
Mir, Robina [3 ]
Mukuria, Clara [1 ]
Powell, Philip A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Sch Hlth & Related Res ScHARR, Regent Court, 30 Regent St, Sheffield S1 4DA, S Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Melbourne, Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Parkville, Vic, Australia
[3] Univ Sheffield, NIHR Res Design Serv Yorkshire & Humber, Regent Court, 30 Regent St, Sheffield S1 4DA, S Yorkshire, England
关键词
Patient reported outcomes (PROs); Health-related quality of life; Response options; Scale development; Scale label; Questionnaires;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-021-02801-9
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 Uncertainties exist in how respondents interpret response options in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), particularly across different domains and for different scale labels. The current study assessed how respondents quantitatively interpret common response options. Methods Members of the general public were recruited to this study via an online panel, stratified by age, gender, and having English as a first language. Participants completed background questions and were randomised to answer questions on one of three domains (i.e. loneliness (negatively phrased), happiness or activities (positively phrased)). Participants were asked to provide quantitative interpretations of response options (e.g. how many times per week is equal to "often") and to order several common response options (e.g. occasionally, sometimes) on a 0-100 slider scale. Chi-squared tests and regression analyses were used to assess whether response options were interpreted consistently across domains and respondent characteristics. Results Data from 1377 participants were analysed. There was general consistency in quantifying the number of times over the last 7 days to which each response option referred. Response options were consistently assigned a lower value in the loneliness than happiness and activities domains. Individual differences, such as age and English as a second language, explained some significant variation in responses, but less than domain. Conclusion Members of the public quantify common response options in a similar way, but their quantification is not equivalent across domains or every type of respondent. Recommendations for the use of certain scale labels over others in PROM development are provided.
引用
收藏
页码:2097 / 2108
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Development of a patient-reported outcome measure of recovery after abdominal surgery: a hypothesized conceptual framework
    Alam, Roshni
    Figueiredo, Sabrina M.
    Balvardi, Saba
    Nauche, Benedicte
    Landry, Tara
    Lee, Lawrence
    Mayo, Nancy E.
    Feldman, Liane S.
    Fiore, Julio F., Jr.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2018, 32 (12): : 4874 - 4885
  • [22] Development of a patient-reported outcome measure for psychotherapeutic interventions in people with seizures: A mixed methods study
    Michaelis, Rosa
    Meyer, Stephanie
    Reuber, Markus
    Schone, Catrin
    EPILEPSY & BEHAVIOR, 2019, 99
  • [23] Psychometric evaluation of an experience sampling method-based patient-reported outcome measure in functional dyspepsia
    Klaassen, Tim
    Smeets, Fabienne G. M.
    Vork, Lisa
    Tack, Jan
    Talley, Nicholas J.
    Simren, Magnus
    Aziz, Qasim
    Ford, Alexander C.
    Kruimel, Joanna W.
    Conchillo, Jose M.
    Leue, Carsten
    Masclee, Adrian A. M.
    Keszthelyi, Daniel
    NEUROGASTROENTEROLOGY AND MOTILITY, 2021, 33 (09)
  • [24] A new patient-reported outcome measure for the evaluation of ankle instability: description of the development process and validation protocol
    Spennacchio, Pietro
    Senorski, Eric Hamrin
    Mouton, Caroline
    Cabri, Jan
    Seil, Romain
    Karlsson, Jon
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2024, 19 (01):
  • [25] A brief patient-reported outcome instrument for primary care: German translation and validation of the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP)
    Hermann, Katja
    Kraus, Katharina
    Herrmann, Kathrin
    Joos, Stefanie
    HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2014, 12
  • [26] Overview of Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory for the Quantitative Assessment of Items in Developing Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures Comment
    Cappelleri, Joseph C.
    Lundy, J. Jason
    Hays, Ron D.
    CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2014, 36 (05) : 648 - 662
  • [27] Investigating the impact of open label design on patient-reported outcome results in prostate cancer randomized controlled trials
    Mouillet, Guillaume
    Efficace, Fabio
    Thiery-Vuillemin, Antoine
    Charton, Emilie
    Van Hemelrijck, Mieke
    Sparano, Francesco
    Anota, Amelie
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2020, 9 (20): : 7363 - 7374
  • [28] A brief patient-reported outcome instrument for primary care: German translation and validation of the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP)
    Katja Hermann
    Katharina Kraus
    Kathrin Herrmann
    Stefanie Joos
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 12
  • [29] Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument
    Gorecki, Claudia
    Brown, Julia M.
    Cano, Stefan
    Lamping, Donna L.
    Briggs, Michelle
    Coleman, Susanne
    Dealey, Carol
    McGinnis, Elizabeth
    Nelson, Andrea E.
    Stubbs, Nikki
    Wilson, Lyn
    Nixon, Jane
    HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2013, 11
  • [30] Development of a new patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure on the Impact of Nighttime Urination (INTU) in patients with nocturiaPsychometric validation
    Bennett, Jason B.
    Gillard, Kristin Khalaf
    Banderas, Benjamin
    Abrams, Steven
    Cheng, Linda
    Fein, Seymour
    NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS, 2018, 37 (05) : 1678 - 1685