Frederik Gybel Jensen , Helle Klingenberg Iversen , Troels Wienecke , Mia Ingerslev Loft
{"title":"Content validity of the aphasia customised electronic patient reported outcome (ACe-PRO) - revealing hidden difficulties post stroke","authors":"Frederik Gybel Jensen , Helle Klingenberg Iversen , Troels Wienecke , Mia Ingerslev Loft","doi":"10.1016/j.jcomdis.2025.106559","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate the content validity of the Aphasia Customised electronic Patient Reported Outcome (ACe-PRO) questionnaire, designed for people with aphasia following stroke. ACe-PRO serves as a dialogue tool to address hidden difficulties in post-stroke consultations.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The study followed the COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) guidelines for content validity, focusing on relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility. Data were collected through cognitive interviews with nine people with aphasia and structured as well as semi-structured interviews with seventeen healthcare professionals.</div></div><div><h3>Result</h3><div>Both people with aphasia and healthcare professionals found ACe-PRO relevant. However, healthcare professionals identified challenges with unclear underlying concepts in certain items. People with aphasia reported issues with wording and pictorial support. The comprehensiveness of the tool was generally rated as good, though suggestions for additional items were made.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>ACe-PRO was assessed somewhat relevant. Adjustments are required to enhance its comprehensibility, particularly regarding wording, pictorial support, and the response scale. Further testing is needed to assess respondent burden in clinical practice and to validate its use in a digital format.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49175,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Disorders","volume":"117 ","pages":"Article 106559"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992425000668","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
This study aimed to evaluate the content validity of the Aphasia Customised electronic Patient Reported Outcome (ACe-PRO) questionnaire, designed for people with aphasia following stroke. ACe-PRO serves as a dialogue tool to address hidden difficulties in post-stroke consultations.
Method
The study followed the COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) guidelines for content validity, focusing on relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility. Data were collected through cognitive interviews with nine people with aphasia and structured as well as semi-structured interviews with seventeen healthcare professionals.
Result
Both people with aphasia and healthcare professionals found ACe-PRO relevant. However, healthcare professionals identified challenges with unclear underlying concepts in certain items. People with aphasia reported issues with wording and pictorial support. The comprehensiveness of the tool was generally rated as good, though suggestions for additional items were made.
Conclusion
ACe-PRO was assessed somewhat relevant. Adjustments are required to enhance its comprehensibility, particularly regarding wording, pictorial support, and the response scale. Further testing is needed to assess respondent burden in clinical practice and to validate its use in a digital format.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Communication Disorders publishes original articles on topics related to disorders of speech, language and hearing. Authors are encouraged to submit reports of experimental or descriptive investigations (research articles), review articles, tutorials or discussion papers, or letters to the editor ("short communications"). Please note that we do not accept case studies unless they conform to the principles of single-subject experimental design. Special issues are published periodically on timely and clinically relevant topics.