Investigation of the Content Validity, Feasibility, Internal Consistency, and Construct Validity of 5 Patient-Reported Outcome Questions on Patient Involvement in Care Among Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Multimethods Study.

Q2 Medicine
Annesofie Lunde Jensen, Rikke Bjerre Lassen, Caroline Bruun Abild, Kurt Kristensen, Lene Juel Solskov, Jens Thusgaard Hoerlück
{"title":"Investigation of the Content Validity, Feasibility, Internal Consistency, and Construct Validity of 5 Patient-Reported Outcome Questions on Patient Involvement in Care Among Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Multimethods Study.","authors":"Annesofie Lunde Jensen, Rikke Bjerre Lassen, Caroline Bruun Abild, Kurt Kristensen, Lene Juel Solskov, Jens Thusgaard Hoerlück","doi":"10.2196/86580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Validated measurement tools that focus solely on assessing adolescents' involvement in their treatment are scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study aimed to validate 5 patient-reported outcome (PRO) questions regarding patient involvement in care among adolescents with type 1 diabetes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multimethod and questionnaire design was used. A total of 447 adolescents (aged 11-18 y) completed a short questionnaire that included 5 PRO questions regarding patient involvement in their care. In total, 25 interviews were conducted with 20 adolescents, as some adolescents were interviewed twice. The content validity, feasibility, internal consistency, and construct validity of the PRO questions were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Assessment of validity revealed that most participants encountered no or minor difficulties comprehending the PRO questions. The interviews demonstrated that all participants showed a satisfactory understanding of 3 of the 5 PRO questions. However, the terms \"appropriate\" and \"experiences\" posed a challenge for 3 out of 20 participants. Using data from the questionnaire, the feasibility, internal consistency, and construct validity analyses uncovered only 2 limitations in validity. First, the clinical use of the questions limits anonymity, potentially introducing bias. Second, adolescents younger than the age of 15 years had more difficulty with the item \"I talked to the health care staff about the questions or concerns I had.\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The PRO questions are valid for measuring patient involvement among adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Respondents stated that the PRO questions were easy to understand, relevant, and comprehensive. There should be awareness when using the PRO questions, as they are most robust for those aged 15 years or older. Therefore, using these PRO questions in both clinical settings and research demands thoughtful consideration regarding their application and setup, particularly when considering the age of respondents and circumstances. It is worth noting that these PRO questions may pose validity challenges for use among adolescents younger than the age of 15 years with type 1 diabetes.</p>","PeriodicalId":36208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participatory Medicine","volume":"18 ","pages":"e86580"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13187346/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Participatory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/86580","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Validated measurement tools that focus solely on assessing adolescents' involvement in their treatment are scarce.

Objective: The study aimed to validate 5 patient-reported outcome (PRO) questions regarding patient involvement in care among adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Methods: A multimethod and questionnaire design was used. A total of 447 adolescents (aged 11-18 y) completed a short questionnaire that included 5 PRO questions regarding patient involvement in their care. In total, 25 interviews were conducted with 20 adolescents, as some adolescents were interviewed twice. The content validity, feasibility, internal consistency, and construct validity of the PRO questions were analyzed.

Results: Assessment of validity revealed that most participants encountered no or minor difficulties comprehending the PRO questions. The interviews demonstrated that all participants showed a satisfactory understanding of 3 of the 5 PRO questions. However, the terms "appropriate" and "experiences" posed a challenge for 3 out of 20 participants. Using data from the questionnaire, the feasibility, internal consistency, and construct validity analyses uncovered only 2 limitations in validity. First, the clinical use of the questions limits anonymity, potentially introducing bias. Second, adolescents younger than the age of 15 years had more difficulty with the item "I talked to the health care staff about the questions or concerns I had."

Conclusions: The PRO questions are valid for measuring patient involvement among adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Respondents stated that the PRO questions were easy to understand, relevant, and comprehensive. There should be awareness when using the PRO questions, as they are most robust for those aged 15 years or older. Therefore, using these PRO questions in both clinical settings and research demands thoughtful consideration regarding their application and setup, particularly when considering the age of respondents and circumstances. It is worth noting that these PRO questions may pose validity challenges for use among adolescents younger than the age of 15 years with type 1 diabetes.

青少年1型糖尿病患者参与护理的5个患者报告结果问题的内容效度、可行性、内部一致性和结构效度调查:多方法研究
背景:仅关注于评估青少年参与治疗的有效测量工具是稀缺的。目的:本研究旨在验证青少年1型糖尿病患者参与护理的5个患者报告结果(PRO)问题。方法:采用多方法和问卷调查设计。共有447名青少年(11-18岁)完成了一份简短的问卷调查,其中包括5个关于患者参与其护理的PRO问题。总共对20名青少年进行了25次访谈,因为有些青少年接受了两次访谈。分析了PRO问题的内容效度、可行性、内部一致性和结构效度。结果:效度评估显示,大多数参与者在理解PRO问题时没有或只有轻微的困难。访谈表明,所有参与者对5个PRO问题中的3个问题都有满意的理解。然而,“合适”和“经验”这两个词对20名参与者中的3人构成了挑战。使用问卷的数据,可行性、内部一致性和结构效度分析只发现了两个效度限制。首先,这些问题的临床使用限制了匿名性,可能会引入偏见。其次,年龄小于15岁的青少年在回答“我向卫生保健人员讲述了我的问题或担忧”这一问题时更困难。结论:PRO问题对测量青少年1型糖尿病患者的参与是有效的。受访者表示,PRO问题容易理解,相关和全面。在使用PRO问题时应该有一定的意识,因为它们最适合15岁或以上的人。因此,在临床环境和研究中使用这些PRO问题需要对其应用和设置进行深思熟虑的考虑,特别是在考虑受访者的年龄和环境时。值得注意的是,这些PRO问题可能会对15岁以下1型糖尿病青少年的有效性提出挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Participatory Medicine
Journal of Participatory Medicine Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书