Administering selected subscales of patient-reported outcome questionnaires to reduce patient burden and increase relevance: a position statement on a modular approach

Author:

Serrano Daniel,Cella David,Husereau Don,King-Kallimanis Bellinda,Mendoza Tito,Salmonson Tomas,Stone Arthur,Zaleta Alexandra,Dhanda Devender,Moshyk Andriy,Liu Fei,Shields Alan L.,Taylor Fiona,Spite Sasha,Shaw James W.,Braverman Julia

Abstract

AbstractPatient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires considered in this paper contain multiple subscales, although not all subscales are equally relevant for administration in all target patient populations. A group of measurement experts, developers, license holders, and other scientific-, regulatory-, payer-, and patient-focused stakeholders participated in a panel to discuss the benefits and challenges of a modular approach, defined here as administering a subset of subscales out of a multi-scaled PRO measure. This paper supports the position that it is acceptable, and sometimes preferable, to take a modular approach when administering PRO questionnaires, provided that certain conditions have been met and a rigorous selection process performed. Based on the experiences and perspectives of all stakeholders, using a modular approach can reduce patient burden and increase the relevancy of the items administered, and thereby improve measurement precision and eliminate wasted data without sacrificing the scientific validity and utility of the instrument. The panelists agreed that implementing a modular approach is not expected to have a meaningful impact on item responses, subscale scores, variability, reliability, validity, and effect size estimates; however, collecting additional evidence for the impact of context may be desirable. It is also important to recognize that adequate rationale and evidence (e.g., of fit-for-purpose status and relevance to patients) and a robust consensus process that includes patient perspectives are required to inform selection of subscales, as in any other measurement circumstance, is expected. We believe that the considerations discussed within (content validity, administration context, and psychometric factors) are relevant across multiple therapeutic areas.

Funder

Bristol-Myers Squibb

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Reference45 articles.

1. Mercieca-Bebber, R., King, M. T., Calvert, M. J., Stockler, M. R., & Friedlander, M. (2018). The importance of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and strategies for future optimization. Patient Related Outcome Measures, 9, 353–367. https://doi.org/10.2147/prom.s156279

2. Coleman, R. L., Beck, J. T., Baranda, J. C., Jacobs, I., Smoyer, K. E., Lee, L. J., Askerova, Z., McGinnis, J., & Ganti, A. K. (2021). The use of patient-reported outcome measures in phase I oncology clinical trials. Oncology, 99(7), 444–453. https://doi.org/10.1159/000514874

3. Atkinson, T. M., Schwartz, C. E., Goldstein, L., Garcia, I., Storfer, D. F., Li, Y., Zhang, J., Bochner, B. H., & Rapkin, B. D. (2019). Perceptions of response burden associated with completion of patient-reported outcome assessments in oncology. Value in Health, 22(2), 225–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2018.07.875

4. Aiyegbusi, O. L., Roydhouse, J., Rivera, S. C., Kamudoni, P., Schache, P., Wilson, R., Stephens, R., & Calvert, M. (2022). Key considerations to reduce or address respondent burden in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection. Nature Communications, 13(1), 6026. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33826-4

5. Williamson, P. R., Altman, D. G., Bagley, H., Barnes, K. L., Blazeby, J. M., Brookes, S. T., Clarke, M., Gargon, E., Gorst, S., Harman, N., Kirkham, J. J., McNair, A., Prinsen, C. A. C., Schmitt, J., Terwee, C. B., & Young, B. (2017). The COMET handbook: version 1.0. Trials, 18(3), 280. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1978-4

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3