Dataset Information

Establishing content-validity of a disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for patients with chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Chronic Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis (CHP) is caused by an immune mediated response in the lung tissue after exposure to an inhaled environmental antigenic stimulant. We previously documented the ways in which CHP impacts patients' lives and have now developed a disease-specific instrument, the CHP-HRQOL instrument, to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The objective of this study was to assess content validity for the CHP-HRQOL.

Methods

Cognitive interviews were conducted among adults with CHP. The instrument was revised and refined between each round of interviews. Feedback was obtained on the instructions, items, response options, and recall period. Items where participants had difficulty with comprehension, wording, or misinterpretation were marked by the interviewer and participant feedback was reviewed to make revisions, add or delete items when appropriate. Readability statistics were calculated using Flesch-Kincaid grade level and reading ease scores.

Results

Ten participants were interviewed over three rounds, with revisions made to the questionnaire in an iterative process. In the initial 39 item instrument, we identified 7 items where two or more participants reported difficulty. Participants preferred a four-week recall period (compared to a two-week recall period) and response options with a 5-point response scale. The final version of the CHP-HRQOL includes 40 items with a median reading level between 6th and 7th grade.

Conclusion

The CHP-HRQOL instrument demonstrated high content validity and is ready for psychometric testing in further validation studies.

SUBMITTER: Aronson KI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7809073 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Establishing content-validity of a disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for patients with chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis.

Aronson Kerri I KI Ali Maha M Reshetynak Evgeniya E Kaner Robert J RJ Martinez Fernando J FJ Safford Monika M MM Pinheiro Laura C LC

Journal of patient-reported outcomes 20210114 1

<h4>Background</h4>Chronic Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis (CHP) is caused by an immune mediated response in the lung tissue after exposure to an inhaled environmental antigenic stimulant. We previously documented the ways in which CHP impacts patients' lives and have now developed a disease-specific instrument, the CHP-HRQOL instrument, to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The objective of this study was to assess content validity for the CHP-HRQOL.<h4>Methods</h4>Cognitive interview ...[more]

PMID: 33443657

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (CHP) is an immune-mediated interstitial lung disease (ILD) caused by inhalational exposure to environmental antigens, resulting in parenchymal fibrosis. By definition, a diagnosis of CHP assumes a history of antigen exposure, but only half of all patients eventually diagnosed with CHP will have a causative antigen identified. Individual clinician variation in eliciting a history of antigen exposure may affect the frequency and confidence of CHP diagnosis.MethodsA list of potential causative exposures were derived from a systematic review of the literature. A Delphi method was applied to an international panel of ILD experts to obtain consensus regarding technique for the elicitation of exposure to antigens relevant to a diagnosis of CHP. The consensus threshold was set at 80% agreement, and median ≤ 2, interquartile range = 0 on a 5-point Likert scale (1, strongly agree; 2, tend to agree; 3, neither agree nor disagree; 4, disagree; 5, strongly disagree).ResultsIn two rounds, 36/40 experts participated. Experts agreed on 18 exposure items to ask every patient with suspected CHP. Themes included CHP inducing exposures, features that contribute to an exposure's relevance, and quantification of a relevant exposure. Based on the results from the literature review and Delphi process, a CHP exposure assessment instrument was derived. Using cognitive interviews, the instrument was revised by patients with ILD for readability and usability.ConclusionsThis Delphi survey provides items that ILD experts agree are important to ask in all patients presenting with suspected CHP and provides basis for a systematically derived CHP exposure assessment instrument. Clinical utility of this exposure assessment instrument may be affected by different local prevalence patterns of exposures. Ongoing research is required to clinically validate these items and consider their impact in more geographically diverse settings.

Project description:BACKGROUND:A poor quality diet is a well-known risk factor for many chronic diseases. However, eating a healthful diet is not always simple as many underlying factors can impede adherence. Individuals with fewer barriers are more likely to eat a healthful diet than those who have more barriers. Accurately measuring barriers to eating a healthful diet could inform personalized interventions, particularly those aiming to prevent chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to establish content validity for selected items obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) database to be considered for inclusion as items on the conceptualized Dietary Health Status (DHS) instrument, which is designed to measure barriers to eating a healthful diet in adults. METHODS:The Behavioral Change Wheel hub COM-B and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were the two theoretical frameworks underpinning the development of the DHS instrument. Seven steps were conducted to create the instrument: 1) development of operational definitions for each TDF domain; 2) identification of items from the NHANES database 2011-2012; 3) screening of items to ensure inclusion of all relevant items; 4) assigning items to a theory-based domain; 5) evaluation of the items against inclusion/exclusion criteria; 6) solicitation of feedback from expert reviewers to reach consensus on inclusion into a domain; and 7) validation of items. RESULTS:A total of 170 items representing twelve domains were identified as potential barriers to eating a healthful diet-- knowledge, optimism, beliefs about consequences, beliefs about capabilities, reinforcement, memory, attention and decision processes, environmental context and resources, social influences, emotion, behavioral regulation, health identity, and functional status. CONCLUSION:Expert review consultation and a consensus approach established content validity for 12 theory-based domains comprised of 170 items identified as potential barriers to eating a healthful diet. The use of these explanatory domains may: assist researchers to better understand barriers to adult dietary practices; inform the development of a screening tool that could be used in a community setting to measure barriers to eating a healthful diet; and inform individualized interventions.

Project description:BackgroundLow and middle-income countries have growing older populations and could benefit from the use of multi-domain geriatric assessments in overcoming the challenge of providing quality health services to older persons. This paper reports on the outcomes of a study carried out in Cape Town, South Africa on the validity of the interRAI Check-Up Self-Report instrument, a multi-domain assessment instrument designed to screen older persons in primary health settings. This is the first criterion validity study of the instrument. The instrument is designed to identify specific health problems and needs, including psychosocial or cognition problems and issues related to functional decline. The interRAI Check-Up Self-Report is designed to be compatible with the clinician administered instruments in the interRAI suite of assessments, but the validity of the instrument against clinician ratings has not yet been established. We therefore sought to establish whether community health workers, rather than trained healthcare professionals could reliably administer the self-report instrument to older persons.MethodsWe evaluated the criterion validity of the self-report instrument through comparison to assessments completed by a clinician assessor. A total of 112 participants, aged 60 or older were recruited from 7 seniors clubs in Khayelitsha, Cape Town. Each participant was assessed by one of two previously untrained, non-healthcare personnel using the Check-Up Self-report version and again by a trained assessor using the clinician version of the interRAI Check-Up within 48 h. Our analyses focused on the degree of agreement between the self-reported and clinician-rated versions of the Check-Up based on the simple or weighted kappa values for the two types of ratings. Binary variables used simple kappas, and ordinal variables with three or more levels were examined using weighted kappas with Fleiss-Cohen weights.ResultsBased on Cohen's Kappa values, we were able to establish that high levels of agreement existed between clinical assessors and lay interviewers, indicating that the instrument can be validly administered by community health workers without formal healthcare training. 13% of items had kappa values ranging between 0.10 and 0.39; 51% of items had kappa values between 0.4 and 0.69; and 36% of items had values of between 0.70 and 1.00.ConclusionOur findings indicate that there is potential for the Check-Up Self-Report instrument to be implemented in under-resourced health systems such as South Africa's.

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are no outcome measures assessing the ability of people with non-specific low back pain to self-manage their illness. Inspired by the 'Patient Enablement Instrument', we developed the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP). The aim of this study was to describe the development of the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) and investigate content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects.MethodsThe PEI-BP consists of 6 items that are rated on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale. Measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and were based on three cohorts from primary care with low back pain: The content validity cohort (N = 14) which participated in semi-structured interviews, the GLA:D® Back cohort (N = 272) and the test-retest cohort (N = 37) which both completed self-reported questionnaires. For construct validity and responsiveness, enablement was compared to disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back pain beliefs (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity), mental health (SF-36), educational level and number of previous episodes of low back pain.ResultsThe PEI-BP was found to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error) and responsiveness. The Smallest Detectable Change was 10.1 points illustrating that a patient would have to change more than 1/6 of the scale range for it to be a true change. A skewed distribution towards the high scores were found at baseline indicating a potentially problematic ceiling effect in the current population.ConclusionsThe PEI-BP can be considered a valid and reliable tool to measure enablement on people seeking care for non-specific LBP. Further testing of the PEI-BP in populations with more severe LBP is recommended.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Dataset Information

Establishing content-validity of a disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for patients with chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Establishing content-validity of a disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for patients with chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets