Dataset Information

Development and validation of a novel patient-reported outcome measure in people with episodic migraine and chronic migraine: The Activity Impairment in Migraine Diary.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the content validity and psychometric properties of the Activity Impairment in Migraine Diary (AIM-D).

Background

Measuring treatment effects on migraine impairment requires a psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure developed consistent with U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidance.

Methods

The AIM-D was created from concepts that emerged during qualitative interviews with five clinicians experienced in treating migraine and concept elicitation (CE) interviews with 40 adults with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM). The initial version was refined based on three waves of cognitive interviews with 38 adults with EM or CM and input from a panel of clinical and measurement experts. The AIM-D was psychometrically evaluated using data from 316 adults with EM or CM who participated in a 13-week prospective observational study. Study participants completed PRO assessments including the AIM-D and a daily headache diary. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were used to determine the factor structure. The reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the AIM-D were assessed. Additional PRO measures including the Patient Global Impression - Severity (PGI-S), Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, Version 2.1 Role Function-Restrictive domain, and Headache Impact Test were used for psychometric evaluation of the AIM-D.

Results

Based on CE interviews with adults with migraine and input from an expert panel, activity impairment was identified as the target in the preliminary conceptual framework, which had two domains: performance of daily activities (PDAs) and physical impairment (PI). Revision of the draft AIM-D through multiple rounds of cognitive interviews and expert panel meetings resulted in a content valid 11-item version. Exploratory factor analysis supported both one- and two-domain structures for the AIM-D, which were further supported by confirmatory factor analysis (factor loadings all >0.90). The AIM-D domains (PDA and PI) and total score showed high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.95-0.97), acceptable test-retest reliability for weekly average scores (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.60 for participants with no change in PGI-S between baseline and week 2), and good convergent and known-groups validity. There was evidence of responsiveness based on changes in PGI-S score and monthly migraine days.

Conclusion

The AIM-D is a content valid and psychometrically sound measure designed to evaluate activity impairment and is suitable for use in clinical trials of preventive treatments for EM or CM.

SUBMITTER: Lipton RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9306594 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Hyperhidrosis is estimated to affect ~ 4.8% of the US population, and most patients experience a negative psychological impact. Here, we describe development and psychometric evaluation of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure to assess severity of axillary hyperhidrosis in clinical trials that meets current U.S. regulatory standards to support product approvals. METHODS:Three rounds of hybrid concept-elicitation/cognitive-debriefing qualitative interviews were conducted in adults with clinician-diagnosed primary axillary hyperhidrosis, followed by similar interviews in children/adolescents. The draft measure included diary items for presence, severity, impact and bothersomeness (basis of the Axillary Sweating Daily Diary [ASDD]), exploratory weekly impact items, and a single-item Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Phase 2 (adults only) and phase 3 (adults and children ≥9 years) clinical trial data were utilized to evaluate measurement properties of the resulting draft measure: floor/ceiling effects, nonresponse bias, test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness were assessed. The primary concept of interest was axillary sweating severity (ASDD Item 2); however, additional supportive concepts were explored to allow for development of a comprehensive hyperhidrosis measure. RESULTS:Twenty-nine patient interviews were conducted (N = 21 adult and N = 8 children/adolescents), resulting in the ASDD (4 items, patients ≥16y) and child-specific ASDD-C (2 items ≥9y to <16y), as well as 6 Weekly Impact items and the PGIC (patients ≥16y). No floor/ceiling effects or response biases were identified. Consistency between hypothesized and observed correlation patterns between ASDD/ASDD-C items and other efficacy measures supported construct validity. Intraclass correlation coefficients supported test-retest reliability (0.91-0.93; Item 2). Large effect sizes (- 2.2 to - 2.4) demonstrated that the ASDD/ASDD-C Item 2 could detect changes in hyperhidrosis severity, supporting the measure's responsiveness. Patients perceiving a moderate improvement in symptoms on the PGIC experienced an average 3.8-point improvement on ASDD axillary sweating severity (Item 2); thus, a 4-point responder threshold was defined as a clinically meaningful change. CONCLUSIONS:Qualitative and quantitative evidence support the reliability and validity of the ASDD/ASDD-C and its use in the clinical evaluation of axillary hyperhidrosis treatments. Further evaluation of this measure in future research studies is warranted to demonstrate consistent performance across different axillary hyperhidrosis populations and in different study contexts.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the measurement properties of all three domains of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ v2.1) electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) to assess the functional impact of migraine in patients with episodic or chronic migraine (CM); and identify meaningful within-patient change thresholds for the Role Function-Restrictive (RFR), Role Function-Preventive (RFP), and Emotional Function (EF) domains.MethodsData were drawn from three double-blind, placebo-controlled, and randomized Phase 3 clinical studies (episodic migraine [EM]: EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2; CM: REGAIN). The psychometric properties of the MSQ v2.1 ePRO domains were demonstrated by evaluating reliability (internal consistency and test-retest), construct validity (convergent and known groups), and responsiveness. Meaningful within-patient change thresholds for domains were estimated using anchor-based approaches, supplemented by empirical cumulative distribution function curves and probability density function plots to enable interpretation of meaningful change over 3 months. The Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S) and Patient Global Impression of Improvement served as anchors.ResultsA total of 2,850 patients with either EM (EVOLVE-1: 851; EVOLVE-2: 909) or CM (REGAIN: 1,090) were included. The Cronbach's alpha estimates of internal consistency exceeded the recommended threshold of ≥0.70 for all domains from the three studies, indicating adequate internal consistency. Test-retest reliability intraclass correlation coefficients were ≥0.80 for all domains across all three studies, demonstrating almost perfect agreement. Convergent validity was supported by moderate-to-strong correlation (r ≥ 0.30) between all domains of MSQ v2.1 ePRO and studied anchors (Migraine Disability Assessment Score and PGI-S scores) across all three studies. Known group validity was established between all domains and subgroups of patients stratified by baseline PGI-S scores and baseline number of monthly migraine headache days for all three studies. The 3-month meaningful within-patient change thresholds were the same for EM and CM for RFP: 20.00 and EF: 26.67; and for RFR: 25.71.ConclusionsThese findings demonstrate that all three domains of the MSQ v2.1 ePRO have sufficient reliability, validity, responsiveness, and appropriate interpretation standards. Our results suggest that MSQ v2.1 ePRO is a well-defined and reliable patient-reported outcome instrument that is suitable for use in clinical studies for evaluating the impact of migraine on patient functioning in episodic and CM.

Project description:Abstract Background We have previously described the development and content validity of a new patient-reported outcome measure (PRO) to assess patients’ subjective experience of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia: The Patient-Reported Experience of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia (PRECIS). Here we assess the psychometric properties of the PRECIS PRO in patients with schizophrenia and healthy age-matched controls with the aim of developing a revised version for use in clinical studies. Methods The PRECIS PRO is a 35-item scale comprising eight concept domains (memory, communication, control, planning, handling problems, attention, sharp thinking and overall experience), each with multiple individual items. PRECIS was administered to psychiatrically-healthy controls (single visit), and a subset of patients in a large, clinical trial assessing patients with schizophrenia on stable antipsychotic treatment (NCT02281773) at baseline and Weeks 6, 9 and 12. Analysis of the original 35-item PRECIS PRO included factor structure, factor analysis (FA), internal consistency, test-retest reliability and discriminant (known groups) validity testing. FA was performed on all pre-treatment scores in the patient group (n=410) and patients and controls combined (n=498). Individual items with less than adequate reliability or validity were then identified and eliminated or modified. Results Questionnaire responses were collected from 410 patients with schizophrenia and 88 healthy controls. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) total PRECIS score was significantly lower for healthy controls (1.39 [0.7]) compared with patients (2.06 [1.2]; p<0.0001), as was overall experience domain score (1.41 [0.7] vs 2.35 [1.3]; p<0.0001). For each domain of patient experience, PRECIS mean scores were also significantly lower for healthy controls compared to patients with schizophrenia. The mean differences between groups ranged from -0.94 (overall experience domain) to -0.52 (control domain; p<0.0001, all domains). Patients with schizophrenia had wider response distributions compared with controls, while the control group had marked “floor effects” across most items. Initial exploratory FA of the 35-item PRECIS PRO identified a 6-domain solution that accounted for 62% of total item variance, and Cronbach’s alpha (0.959) indicated an extremely high level of internal consistency. Following analyses of the 35-item PRECIS PRO, a total of 11 items were eliminated based on pre-specified criteria (poor loading onto identified factors, marked floor effects in patient groups or <50% test-retest reliability). Confirmatory FA of the revised 24-item PRECIS PRO identified 1 primary domain (attention) and 3 secondary additional domains (memory, executive function, communication). An additional domain included items related to patient distress or bother related to cognitive impairment. There was a high level of internal consistency both for the overall 24-item PRECIS PRO (Cronbach’s alpha= 0.942) and individual domains (Cronbach’s alphas: 0.743–0.873). Intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.78 for the overall 24-item PRECIS PRO and ranged from 0.49–0.74 for individual domains. Finally, discriminant validity testing confirmed there were significant differences between the patient group and the control group in each of the 5 domains of the revised 24-item PRECIS PRO (p<0.0001). Discussion This large validation study demonstrated that the revised 24-item PRECIS PRO is a valid and reliable PRO measure with good internal consistency, adequate test-retest reliability and strong discriminant validity. PRECIS may therefore serve to define key patient-based endpoints for use in future clinical studies. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim (1289.20)

Project description:BackgroundNo available studies demonstrate validity and meaningful change thresholds of Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire in patients with migraine. In this post-hoc analysis, we assessed reliability, validity, responsiveness, and meaningful within-patient change from baseline to Month 3 for Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) domain scores in patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM).MethodThe Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled CONQUER study (NCT03559257, N = 462) enrolled patients with EM or CM who failed two to four categories of prior preventive medication in past ten years. The analyses were performed for WPAI domain scores (absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work productivity, and non-work-related activity impairment). Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2.1) domain scores (Role Function-Restrictive [RFR] and Role Function-Preventive [RFP]), and monthly migraine headache days were used as anchors. Responder criteria were changes from baseline to Month 3 for each of these anchors and were defined as: increase in MSQ-RFR by ≥ 25.71 points and MSQ-RFP by ≥ 20.00 points and a 50% reduction in monthly migraine headache days. Assessments were performed for overall population, and patients with EM or CM. The meaningful change threshold was determined based on Youden index, Phi coefficient and sensitivity.ResultsOf 462 randomized patients, 444 who completed WPAI questionnaire were included in post-hoc analysis. Test-retest reliability over 3 months in a stable subgroup revealed moderate correlations for non-work-related Activity Impairment (ICC = 0.446) presenteeism (ICC = 0.438) and a fair correlation for overall work productivity loss (ICC = 0.360). At baseline, all correlations between WPAI domain scores and continuous anchor variables exceeded recommended threshold of ≥ 0.30, except for WPAI domain scores with number of monthly migraine headache days. Patients achieving pre-specified responsiveness thresholds for monthly migraine headache days, and MSQ-RFP, MSQ-RFR from baseline to Month 3 (responders) showed significant improvements in WPAI domain scores compared with non-responders (P < 0.001). The meaningful change thresholds of -20 (% unit) were identified for WPAI domain scores.ConclusionIn conclusion, WPAI has sufficient validity, reliability, responsiveness, and appropriate interpretation standards to assess the impact of EM or CM on presenteeism and overall work productivity loss and non-work-related activity impairment.Trial registrationNCT number of CONQUER study, NCT03559257.