COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study

被引:1069
|
作者
Terwee, C. B. [1 ,2 ]
Prinsen, C. A. C. [1 ,2 ]
Chiarotto, A. [1 ,2 ]
Westerman, M. J. [3 ,4 ]
Patrick, D. L. [5 ]
Alonso, J. [6 ,7 ]
Bouter, L. M. [1 ,2 ,8 ]
de Vet, H. C. W. [1 ,2 ]
Mokkink, L. B. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Med Ctr, POB 7057, NL-1007 MB Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Publ Hlth Res Inst, Med Ctr, POB 7057, NL-1007 MB Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Hlth Sci, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Publ Hlth Res Inst, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[5] Univ Washington, Dept Hlth Serv, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[6] Pompeu Fabra Univ, Dept Expt & Hlth Sci, IMIM Hosp del Mar Med Res Inst, Barcelona, Spain
[7] CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain
[8] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Philosophy, Fac Humanities, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Patient outcome assessment; Validation studies; Content validity; Patient-reported outcome; COSMIN; Systematic review; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; HEALTH-STATUS; PRO INSTRUMENTS; CONSENSUS; GRADE;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0
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
Content validity is the most important measurement property of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) and the most challenging to assess. Our aims were to: (1) develop standards for evaluating the quality of PROM development; (2) update the original COSMIN standards for assessing the quality of content validity studies of PROMs; (3) develop criteria for what constitutes good content validity of PROMs, and (4) develop a rating system for summarizing the evidence on a PROM's content validity and grading the quality of the evidence in systematic reviews of PROMs. An online 4-round Delphi study was performed among 159 experts from 21 countries. Panelists rated the degree to which they (dis)agreed to proposed standards, criteria, and rating issues on 5-point rating scales ('strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'), and provided arguments for their ratings. Discussion focused on sample size requirements, recording and field notes, transcribing cognitive interviews, and data coding. After four rounds, the required 67% consensus was reached on all standards, criteria, and rating issues. After pilot-testing, the steering committee made some final changes. Ten criteria for good content validity were defined regarding item relevance, appropriateness of response options and recall period, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the PROM. The consensus-based COSMIN methodology for content validity is more detailed, standardized, and transparent than earlier published guidelines, including the previous COSMIN standards. This methodology can contribute to the selection and use of high-quality PROMs in research and clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页码:1159 / 1170
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures?
    Frost, Marlene H.
    Reeve, Bryce B.
    Liepa, Astra M.
    Stauffer, Joseph W.
    Hays, Ron D.
    Sloan, Jeff A.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2007, 10 : S94 - S105
  • [42] Reliability and Validity of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Ankle Instability in Hebrew
    Gottlieb, Uri
    Yona, Tomer
    Lumbroso, David Shein
    Hoffman, Jay R.
    Springer, Shmuel
    [J]. MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, 2022, 28
  • [43] Content Validity of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Satisfaction With Primary Care for Musculoskeletal Complaints: A Systematic Review
    Pellekooren, Sylvia
    Ostelo, Raymond
    Pool, Annelies
    van Tulder, Maurits
    Jansma, Elise
    Chiarotto, Alessandro
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC & SPORTS PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2021, 51 (03): : 94 - 102
  • [44] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Severe Recurrent Bilateral Nasal Polyps: Psychometric Evaluation and Content Validity
    Gater, Adam
    Tolley, Chloe
    Williams-Hall, Rebecca
    Trennery, Claire
    Bradley, Helena
    Sikirica, Mirko V.
    Nelsen, Linda
    Sousa, Ana R.
    Bratton, Daniel J.
    Chan, Robert
    von Maltzahn, Robyn
    [J]. OTO OPEN, 2023, 7 (04)
  • [45] 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
    [J]. ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2021, 73 (04) : 510 - 519
  • [46] Content validity of patient-reported outcome measures used in facial transplant recipients: a systematic literature review
    Fullerton, Zoe
    Tsangaris, Elena
    Aycart, Mario
    De Vries, Claire
    Gibbons, Christopher
    Pomahac, Bohdan
    Pusic, Andrea
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2019, 28 : S79 - S79
  • [47] Patient-reported outcome measures in community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review of application and content validity
    Lloyd, Melanie
    Callander, Emily
    Karahalios, Amalia
    Desmond, Lucy
    Karunajeewa, Harin
    [J]. BMJ OPEN RESPIRATORY RESEARCH, 2019, 6 (01)
  • [48] Development and content validity of a hemodialysis symptom patient-reported outcome measure
    Flythe, Jennifer E.
    Dorough, Adeline
    Narendra, Julia H.
    Wingard, Rebecca L.
    Dalrymple, Lorien S.
    DeWalt, Darren A.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2019, 28 (01) : 253 - 265
  • [49] Viewing assessments of patient-reported heath status as conversations: Implications for developing and evaluating patient-reported outcome measures
    Kevin P. Weinfurt
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2019, 28 : 3395 - 3401
  • [50] Development and content validity of a hemodialysis symptom patient-reported outcome measure
    Jennifer E. Flythe
    Adeline Dorough
    Julia H. Narendra
    Rebecca L. Wingard
    Lorien S. Dalrymple
    Darren A. DeWalt
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2019, 28 : 253 - 265