Dataset Information

Positive Outcomes: Validity, reliability and responsiveness of a novel person-centred outcome measure for people with HIV.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Despite successful treatment, people living with HIV experience persisting and burdensome multidimensional problems. We aimed to assess the validity, reliability and responsiveness of Positive Outcomes, a patient-reported outcome measure for use in clinical practice.

Methods

In all, 1392 outpatients in five European countries self-completed Positive Outcomes, PAM-13 (patient empowerment), PROQOL-HIV (quality of life) and FRAIL (frailty) at baseline and 12 months. Analysis assessed: (a) validity (structural, convergent and divergent, discriminant); (b) reliability (internal consistency, test-retest); and (c) responsiveness.

Results

An interpretable four-factor structure was identified: 'emotional wellbeing', 'interpersonal and sexual wellbeing', 'socioeconomic wellbeing' and 'physical wellbeing'. Moderate to strong convergent validity was found for three subscales of Positive Outcomes and PROQOL (ρ = -0.481 to -0.618, all p < 0.001). Divergent validity was found for total scores with weak ρ (-0.295, p < 0.001). Discriminant validity was confirmed with worse Positive Outcomes score associated with increasing odds of worse FRAIL group (4.81-fold, p < 0.001) and PAM-13 level (2.28-fold, p < 0.001). Internal consistency for total Positive Outcomes and its factors exceeded the conservative α threshold of 0.6. Test-retest reliability was established: those with stable PAM-13 and FRAIL scores also reported median Positive Outcomes change of 0. Improved PROQOL-HIV score baseline to 12 months was associated with improved Positive Outcomes score (r = -0.44, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Positive Outcomes face and content validity was previously established, and the remaining validity, reliability and responsiveness properties are now demonstrated. The items within the brief 22-item tool are designed to be actionable by health and social care professionals to facilitate the goal of person-centred care.

SUBMITTER: Harding R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9305143 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO©) scores for quantifying the presence and severity of influenza symptoms.MethodsAn observational prospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years) with influenza-like illness in the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico, and South America was conducted. Participants completed the 37-item draft FLU-PRO daily for up to 14 days. Item-level and factor analyses were used to remove items and determine factor structure. Reliability of the final tool was estimated using Cronbach α and intraclass correlation coefficients (2-day reliability). Convergent and known-groups validity and responsiveness were assessed using global assessments of influenza severity and return to usual health.ResultsOf the 536 patients enrolled, 221 influenza-positive subjects comprised the analytical sample. The mean age of the patients was 40.7 years, 60.2% were women, and 59.7% were white. The final 32-item measure has six factors/domains (nose, throat, eyes, chest/respiratory, gastrointestinal, and body/systemic), with a higher order factor representing symptom severity overall (comparative fit index = 0.92; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06). Cronbach α was high (total = 0.92; domain range = 0.71-0.87); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, day 1-day 2) was 0.83 for total scores and 0.57 to 0.79 for domains. Day 1 FLU-PRO domain and total scores were moderately to highly correlated (≥0.30) with Patient Global Rating of Flu Severity (except nose and throat). Consistent with known-groups validity, scores differentiated severity groups on the basis of global rating (total: F = 57.2, P < 0.001; domains: F = 8.9-67.5, P < 0.001). Subjects reporting return to usual health showed significantly greater (P < 0.05) FLU-PRO score improvement by day 7 than did those who did not, suggesting score responsiveness.ConclusionsResults suggest that FLU-PRO scores are reliable, valid, and responsive to change in influenza-positive adults.

Project description:BackgroundFew measures capture the complex symptoms and concerns of those receiving palliative care.AimTo validate the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale, a measure underpinned by extensive psychometric development, by evaluating its validity, reliability and responsiveness to change.DesignConcurrent, cross-cultural validation study of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale - both (1) patient self-report and (2) staff proxy-report versions. We tested construct validity (factor analysis, known-group comparisons, and correlational analysis), reliability (internal consistency, agreement, and test-retest reliability), and responsiveness (through longitudinal evaluation of change).Setting/participantsIn all, 376 adults receiving palliative care, and 161 clinicians, from a range of settings in the United Kingdom and Germany.ResultsWe confirm a three-factor structure (Physical Symptoms, Emotional Symptoms and Communication/Practical Issues). Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale shows strong ability to distinguish between clinically relevant groups; total Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale and Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale subscale scores were higher - reflecting more problems - in those patients with 'unstable' or 'deteriorating' versus 'stable' Phase of Illness (F = 15.1, p < 0.001). Good convergent and discriminant validity to hypothesised items and subscales of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General is demonstrated. The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale shows good internal consistency (α = 0.77) and acceptable to good test-retest reliability (60% of items kw > 0.60). Longitudinal validity in form of responsiveness to change is good.ConclusionThe Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale is a valid and reliable outcome measure, both in patient self-report and staff proxy-report versions. It can assess and monitor symptoms and concerns in advanced illness, determine the impact of healthcare interventions, and demonstrate quality of care. This represents a major step forward internationally for palliative care outcome measurement.

Project description:The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) has been validated in high-income countries but not yet in low- and middle-income countries. We aimed to assess the reliability of the SRS in a community sample and its validity to discriminate between children with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in Vietnam. We used a three-phase study: piloting the translated SRS, reliability testing, and validation of the SRS in 158 Vietnamese caretakers and their children (ages 4-9 years). We examined reliability, validity and sensitivity, and specificity to ASD diagnosis. We applied receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis to determine optimal cutoff scores discriminating the children with ASD from those without ASD. We also assessed the performance of the SRS short form. We found that reliability was good with high internal consistency (0.88-0.89), test-retest reliability (0.82-0.83), sensitivity (93%), and specificity (98%) for identification of children with ASD. The ROC curves were similar for total raw score and total T-score, with the area under the curve (AUC) values reaching 0.98 and the optimal cutoff of 62 for raw scores and 60 for T-scores. The SRS short form also performed well in distinguishing children with ASD from children without ASD, with high AUC (0.98), sensitivity (90%), and specificity (98%) when using a raw score of 15 as a cutoff. In conclusion, the translated and culturally adapted SRS shows good reliability, validity, and sensitivity for identification of children with ASD in Vietnam. Both SRS long and short forms performed adequately to discriminate between children with and without ASD. Autism Res 2019, 00: 1-13. © 2019 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: Middle-income countries often lack validated tools to evaluate autism symptoms. The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) translated to Vietnamese was reliable and performed well to distinguish between children with and without autism spectrum disorder in Vietnam. The Vietnamese SRS, and translations of the tool to other languages with this methodology, may be useful in pediatric practice, potentially allowing providers to make more appropriate referrals for diagnostic evaluations and identify children for intervention to help them fulfill their developmental potential.

Project description:BackgroundThe surgical outcomes of individual patient with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) can vary depending on various patient-related factors. Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ) is a well-developed tool for outcome measurement and considers both disease-specific and general health aspects. This study aimed to investigate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the JOACMEQ in patients with OPLL in mainland China and to compare post-operative outcomes of OPLL patients between mainland China and Japan.MethodsThis multicenter trial was performed between July 2009 and June 2019. The procedure for the JOACMEQ translation followed Beaton's guidelines. All patients enrolled were diagnosed with OPLL and had completed the JOACMEQ, the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scale, and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) before and after surgery. The reliability (Cronbach's α and Pearson's correlation), construct validity (factor analysis), concurrent validity (Spearman's correlation with SF-36) and responsiveness (effect sizes) of JOACMEQ were evaluated. A mixed-model analytic approach was used to analyze differences in postoperative outcomes between the 2 countries.ResultsNinety-one patients from mainland China and ninety-one patients from Japan were recruited. JOACMEQ showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.75). In test-retest reliability evaluation, except for the bladder function domain, the JOACMEQ domains had good test-retest reliability (0.89-0.96). In factor analysis, most of the items (19/24) were well clustered. Regarding clinical validity, all 5 domains were found to have moderate correlations with the physical component summary (PCS) of SF-36 (r=0.25-0.50), and the bladder function and quality of life domains also had moderate correlations (r=0.25-0.50) with the mental component summary (MCS) of SF-36. JOACMEQ showed a variable responsiveness in different domains (effect size =0.17-0.84; standardized response means =0.15-0.85). Regarding postoperative improvements in the JOACMEQ score, mixed-model analysis revealed a significant difference in the quality of life domain between Chinese and Japanese patients (16.0±18.7 vs. 7.8±17.7, P<0.05).ConclusionsJOACMEQ generally shows good reliability, good validity and mild responsiveness, and can identify the post-operative improvements in patients with OPLL in mainland China. Chinese OPLL patients showed a significantly larger improvement in postoperative quality of life compared to their Japanese counterparts.

Project description:BackgroundA new model of care is required to meet the changing needs of people living with HIV (PLWH), particularly in low and middle-income countries, where prevalence is highest. We evaluated a palliative care intervention for PLWH in Mombasa, Kenya. Although we found no effect on pain (primary outcome), there was a positive effect on mental health (secondary outcome) in the intervention group. To inform replication and implementation, we have determined the active ingredients of the intervention and their mechanisms of action.MethodsWe conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) with qualitative exit interviews in HIV clinic attenders. The intervention was delivered over 5 months, with a minimum of 7 clinical contacts. Longitudinal quantitative data on components of care received were analysed using area under the curve and logistic regression. Qualitative data were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis.ResultsQuantitative data analysis identified that intervention patients received more weak opioid, laxatives, discussion about spiritual worries, emotional support from staff for themselves and their families, time to talk about worries, discussion about future and planning ahead. Qualitative data analysis found that patients reported that having time to talk, appropriate pain medication and effective health education was of therapeutic value for their psychological well-being. Integration of mixed method findings suggest that positive effect in quantitative measures of mental health and well-being are attributable to the active ingredients of: appropriate medication, effective health education and counselling, and having time to talk in clinical encounters. Mechanisms of action include symptom relief, improved understanding of illness and treatment, and support focused on articulated concerns.ConclusionsRoutine care must provide opportunities and means for existing clinical staff to make routine appointments more person-centred. This approach enabled staff to identify and manage multidimensional problems and provide tailored health education and counselling.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01608802 ). Registered 12th May 2012.

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.