Dataset Information

Importance ratings on patient-reported outcome items for survivorship care: comparison between pediatric cancer survivors, parents, and clinicians.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:To compare importance ratings of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) items from the viewpoints of childhood cancer survivors, parents, and clinicians for further developing short-forms to use in survivorship care. METHODS:101 cancer survivors, 101 their parents, and 36 clinicians were recruited from St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Participants were asked to select eight items that they deemed useful for clinical decision making from each of the four Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pediatric item banks. These item banks were pain interference (20 items), fatigue (23 items), psychological stress (19 items), and positive affect (37 items). RESULTS:Compared to survivors, clinicians rated more items across four domains that were statistically different than did parents (23 vs. 13 items). Clinicians rated five items in pain interference domain (ORs 2.33-6.01; p's?

SUBMITTER: Jones CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6021175 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Importance ratings on patient-reported outcome items for survivorship care: comparison between pediatric cancer survivors, parents, and clinicians.

Jones Conor M CM Baker Justin N JN Keesey Rachel M RM Eliason Ruth J RJ Lanctot Jennifer Q JQ Clegg Jennifer L JL Mandrell Belinda N BN Ness Kirsten K KK Krull Kevin R KR Srivastava Deokumar D Forrest Christopher B CB Hudson Melissa M MM Robison Leslie L LL Huang I-Chan IC

Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation 20180418 7

<h4>Purpose</h4>To compare importance ratings of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) items from the viewpoints of childhood cancer survivors, parents, and clinicians for further developing short-forms to use in survivorship care.<h4>Methods</h4>101 cancer survivors, 101 their parents, and 36 clinicians were recruited from St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Participants were asked to select eight items that they deemed useful for clinical decision making from each of the four Patient-Reported Ou ...[more]

PMID: 29671249

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesContent elucidation for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in paediatric cancer survivorship is understudied. We aimed to compare differences in the contents of five PRO domains that are important to paediatric cancer survivorship through semistructured interviews with paediatric cancer survivors and caregivers, and identified new concepts that were not covered in the item banks of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).DesignSemistructured interviews to collect qualitative PRO data from survivors and caregivers.SettingA survivorship care clinic of a comprehensive cancer centre in the USA.ParticipantsThe study included 51 survivors (<18 years old) and 35 caregivers who completed interviews between August and December 2016. Content experts coded the transcribed interviews into 'meaningful concepts' per PROMIS item concepts and identified new concepts per a consensus. Frequencies of meaningful concepts used by survivors and caregivers were compared by Wilcoxon rank-sum test.ResultsFor pain and meaning and purpose, 'Hurt a lot' and 'Purpose in life' were top concepts for survivors and caregivers, respectively. For fatigue and psychological stress, 'Needed to sleep during the day'/'Trouble doing schoolwork' and 'Felt worried' were top concepts for survivors, and 'Felt tired' and 'Felt distress'/'Felt stressed' for caregivers. Survivors reported more physically relevant contents (eg, 'Hard to do sport/exercise'; 0.78 vs 0.23, p=0.007) for pain, fatigue and stress, whereas caregivers used more emotionally relevant concepts (eg, 'Too tired to enjoy things I like to do'; 0.31 vs 0.05, p=0.025). Both groups reported positive thoughts for meaning and purpose (eg, 'Have goals for myself'). One (psychological stress, meaning and purpose) to eleven (fatigue) new concepts were generated.ConclusionsImportant PRO contents in the form of meaningful concepts raised by survivors and caregivers were different and new concepts emerged. PRO measures are warranted to include survivorship-specific items by accounting for the child's and the caregiver's viewpoints.

Project description:BackgroundThe Near Visual Acuity Questionnaire Presbyopia (NAVQ-P) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure that was developed in a phakic presbyopia population to assess near vision function impacts. The study refined and explored the psychometric properties and score interpretability of the NAVQ-P and additional PRO items assessing near vision correction independence (NVCI), near vision satisfaction (NVS), and near vision correction preference (NVCP).MethodsThis was a psychometric validation study conducted using PRO data collected as part of a Phase IIb clinical trial (CUN8R44 A2202) consisting of 235 randomized adults with presbyopia from the US, Japan, Australia, and Canada. Data collected at baseline, week 2, and months 1, 2, and 3 during the 3-month trial treatment period were included in the analyses to assess item (question) properties, NAVQ-P dimensionality and scoring, reliability, validity, and score interpretation.ResultsItem responses were distributed across the full response scale for most NAVQ-P and additional PRO items. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the pre-defined unidimensional structure and calculation of a NAVQ-P total score as a measure of near vision function. Item deletion informed by item response distributions, dimensionality analyses, item response theory, and previous qualitative findings, including clinical input, supported retention of 14 NAVQ-P items. The 14-item NAVQ-P total score had excellent internal consistency (α = 0.979) and high test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients > = 0.898). There was good evidence of construct-related validity for all PROs supported by strong correlations with concurrent measures. Excellent results for known-groups validity and ability to detect change analyses were also demonstrated. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods supported interpretation of scores through generation of group-level and within-individual estimates of meaningful change thresholds. A meaningful within-patient change in the range of 8-15-point improvement on the NAVQ-P total score (score range 0-42) was recommended, including a more specific responder definition of 10-point improvement.ConclusionsThe NAVQ-P, NVCI, and NVS are valid and reliable instruments which have the ability to detect change over time. Findings strongly support the use of these measures as outcome assessments in clinical/research studies and in clinical practice in the presbyopia population.

Dataset Information

Importance ratings on patient-reported outcome items for survivorship care: comparison between pediatric cancer survivors, parents, and clinicians.

Publications

Importance ratings on patient-reported outcome items for survivorship care: comparison between pediatric cancer survivors, parents, and clinicians.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets