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

被引:352
|
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
  • [31] Application of validity theory and methodology to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): building an argument for validity
    Melanie Hawkins
    Gerald R. Elsworth
    Richard H. Osborne
    Quality of Life Research, 2018, 27 : 1695 - 1710
  • [32] Using patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures to elevate the quality of healthcare
    Casaca, Pedro
    Schafer, Willemijn
    Nunes, Ana Beatriz
    Sousa, Paulo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 2023, 35 (04)
  • [33] Reliability of patient-reported outcome measures: Hemorrhage, anticoagulant, antiplatelet medication use
    Selvanayagam, Nicholyn
    Mowbray, Fabrice
    Clayton, Natasha
    Soomro, Asfia
    Varner, Catherine
    McLeod, Shelley
    de Wit, Kerstin
    RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2021, 5 (04)
  • [34] Shifting the validation paradigm for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): assembling and evaluating quantitative and qualitative validity evidence
    Hawkins, Melanie
    Nolte, Sandra
    Elsworth, Gerald
    Osborne, Richard
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2018, 27 : S113 - S113
  • [35] Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in wrist osteoarthritis: test-retest reliability and construct validity
    Larsson, Sara L.
    Brogren, Elisabeth
    Dahlin, Lars B.
    Bjorkman, Anders
    Ekstrand, Elisabeth
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2022, 23 (01)
  • [36] Development and evaluation of disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures questionnaire for polymyalgia rheumatica: validity, reliability, and responsiveness
    Yasser El Miedany
    Maha Elgaafary
    Sami Bahlas
    Waleed Hassan
    Safaa Mahran
    Ali El Miedany
    Walaa Elwakil
    Egyptian Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, 52 (1)
  • [37] Quantifying the patient experience with patient-reported outcome measures
    Lapin, Brittany
    Bautista, Joceyln
    Bae, Charles
    Katzan, Irene
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (01) : 98 - 98
  • [38] Patient-reported Outcome Measures A Stethoscope for the Patient History
    Griggs, Cornelia L.
    Schneider, Jeffrey C.
    Kazis, Lewis E.
    Ryan, Colleen M.
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2017, 265 (06) : 1066 - 1067
  • [39] Patient-reported outcome measures in cardiovascular disease
    Kornowski, Ran
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL-QUALITY OF CARE AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES, 2023, 9 (02) : 119 - 127
  • [40] A theoretical framework for patient-reported outcome measures
    Leah McClimans
    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 2010, 31 : 225 - 240