患者报告的皮肤病影响(PRIDD)测量方法的测量特性和可解释性。

IF 11 1区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Rachael Pattinson, Nirohshah Trialonis-Suthakharan, Tim Pickles, Jennifer Austin, Allison FitzGerald, Matthias Augustin, Christine Bundy
{"title":"患者报告的皮肤病影响(PRIDD)测量方法的测量特性和可解释性。","authors":"Rachael Pattinson, Nirohshah Trialonis-Suthakharan, Tim Pickles, Jennifer Austin, Allison FitzGerald, Matthias Augustin, Christine Bundy","doi":"10.1093/bjd/ljae267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial in assessing the impact of dermatological conditions on people's lives, but the existing dermatology-specific PROMs are not recommended for use, according to COSMIN. We developed the Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure in partnership with patients. It has strong evidence of content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, acceptability and feasibility.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To test the remaining measurement properties of the PRIDD and establish the interpretability of scores against the COSMIN criteria, using classic and modern psychometric methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A global longitudinal study consisting of two online surveys administered 2-4 weeks apart was carried out. Adults (≥ 18 years of age) living with a dermatological condition were recruited via the International Alliance of Dermatology Patient Organizations' (GlobalSkin) membership network. Participants completed PRIDD, a demographics questionnaire and other related measures, including the Dermatology Life Quality Index. We tested the criterion validity, construct validity and responsiveness (Spearman's ρ, independent-samples t-tests and Anova); test-retest reliability [interclass correlation coefficient (ICC)]; measurement error [smallest detectable change or limits of agreement (LoA), distribution-based minimally important change (MIC)]; floor and ceiling effects (number of minimum and maximum scores and person-item location distribution maps), score bandings (κ coefficient of agreement) and the anchor-based MIC of the PRIDD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 504 people with 35 dermatological conditions from 38 countries participated. Criterion validity (ρ = 0.79), construct validity (76% hypotheses met), test-retest validity (ICC = 0.93) and measurement error (LoA = 1.3 < MIC = 4.14) were sufficient. Floor and ceiling effects were in the acceptable range (< 15%). Score bandings were determined (κ = 0.47); however, the anchor-based MIC could not be calculated owing to an insufficient anchor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PRIDD is a valid and reliable tool to evaluate the impact of dermatological disease on people's lives in research and clinical practice. It is the first dermatology-specific PROM to meet the COSMIN criteria. These results support the value of developing and validating PROMs with a patient-centred approach and using classic and modern psychometric methods. Further testing of responsiveness and MIC, cross-cultural translation, linguistic validation and global data collection are planned.</p>","PeriodicalId":9238,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Dermatology","volume":" ","pages":"936-948"},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement properties and interpretability of the Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure.\",\"authors\":\"Rachael Pattinson, Nirohshah Trialonis-Suthakharan, Tim Pickles, Jennifer Austin, Allison FitzGerald, Matthias Augustin, Christine Bundy\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjd/ljae267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial in assessing the impact of dermatological conditions on people's lives, but the existing dermatology-specific PROMs are not recommended for use, according to COSMIN. We developed the Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure in partnership with patients. It has strong evidence of content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, acceptability and feasibility.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To test the remaining measurement properties of the PRIDD and establish the interpretability of scores against the COSMIN criteria, using classic and modern psychometric methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A global longitudinal study consisting of two online surveys administered 2-4 weeks apart was carried out. Adults (≥ 18 years of age) living with a dermatological condition were recruited via the International Alliance of Dermatology Patient Organizations' (GlobalSkin) membership network. Participants completed PRIDD, a demographics questionnaire and other related measures, including the Dermatology Life Quality Index. We tested the criterion validity, construct validity and responsiveness (Spearman's ρ, independent-samples t-tests and Anova); test-retest reliability [interclass correlation coefficient (ICC)]; measurement error [smallest detectable change or limits of agreement (LoA), distribution-based minimally important change (MIC)]; floor and ceiling effects (number of minimum and maximum scores and person-item location distribution maps), score bandings (κ coefficient of agreement) and the anchor-based MIC of the PRIDD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 504 people with 35 dermatological conditions from 38 countries participated. Criterion validity (ρ = 0.79), construct validity (76% hypotheses met), test-retest validity (ICC = 0.93) and measurement error (LoA = 1.3 < MIC = 4.14) were sufficient. Floor and ceiling effects were in the acceptable range (< 15%). Score bandings were determined (κ = 0.47); however, the anchor-based MIC could not be calculated owing to an insufficient anchor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PRIDD is a valid and reliable tool to evaluate the impact of dermatological disease on people's lives in research and clinical practice. It is the first dermatology-specific PROM to meet the COSMIN criteria. These results support the value of developing and validating PROMs with a patient-centred approach and using classic and modern psychometric methods. Further testing of responsiveness and MIC, cross-cultural translation, linguistic validation and global data collection are planned.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Dermatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"936-948\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae267\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae267","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:患者报告结果测量法(PROMs)对于评估皮肤病对患者生活的影响至关重要,但根据基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN),现有的皮肤病专用PROMs并不推荐使用。我们与患者合作开发了 "患者报告的皮肤病影响"(PRIDD)测量工具。它在内容效度、结构效度、内部一致性、可接受性和可行性方面都有强有力的证据:使用经典和现代心理测量方法测试 PRIDD 的其余测量特性,并根据 COSMIN 标准确定分数的可解释性:方法:一项全球纵向研究,包括两次在线调查,每次间隔两到四周。通过国际皮肤病患者组织联盟(GlobalSkin)的会员网络招募患有皮肤病的成年人(≥ 18 岁)。参与者填写了 PRIDD、人口统计学问卷以及包括皮肤病生活质量指数 (DLQI) 在内的其他相关指标。我们测试了 PRIDD 的标准效度、结构效度和响应度(Spearman's ρ、独立样本 t 检验和方差分析)、测试再测可靠性(类间相关系数 [ICC])、测量误差(最小可检测变化或协议限值 [LoA]、基于分布的最小重要变化 [MIC])、最低和最高效应(最低和最高分的数量和人-项目位置分布图)、分数段(κ 协议系数)和基于锚的最小重要变化:来自 38 个国家的 504 名患有 35 种皮肤病的患者参与了此次研究。标准效度(ρ = 0.79)、构造效度(76%符合假设)、测试-再测效度(ICC = 0.93)和测量误差(LoA = 1.3):在研究和临床实践中,PRIDD 是评估皮肤病对患者生活影响的有效而可靠的工具。它是首个符合 COSMIN 标准的皮肤病专用 PROM。这些结果证明了以患者为中心、采用经典和现代心理测量方法开发和验证 PROM 的价值。我们计划进一步测试响应性和 MIC、跨文化翻译、语言验证和全球数据收集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measurement properties and interpretability of the Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure.

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial in assessing the impact of dermatological conditions on people's lives, but the existing dermatology-specific PROMs are not recommended for use, according to COSMIN. We developed the Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure in partnership with patients. It has strong evidence of content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, acceptability and feasibility.

Objectives: To test the remaining measurement properties of the PRIDD and establish the interpretability of scores against the COSMIN criteria, using classic and modern psychometric methods.

Methods: A global longitudinal study consisting of two online surveys administered 2-4 weeks apart was carried out. Adults (≥ 18 years of age) living with a dermatological condition were recruited via the International Alliance of Dermatology Patient Organizations' (GlobalSkin) membership network. Participants completed PRIDD, a demographics questionnaire and other related measures, including the Dermatology Life Quality Index. We tested the criterion validity, construct validity and responsiveness (Spearman's ρ, independent-samples t-tests and Anova); test-retest reliability [interclass correlation coefficient (ICC)]; measurement error [smallest detectable change or limits of agreement (LoA), distribution-based minimally important change (MIC)]; floor and ceiling effects (number of minimum and maximum scores and person-item location distribution maps), score bandings (κ coefficient of agreement) and the anchor-based MIC of the PRIDD.

Results: In total, 504 people with 35 dermatological conditions from 38 countries participated. Criterion validity (ρ = 0.79), construct validity (76% hypotheses met), test-retest validity (ICC = 0.93) and measurement error (LoA = 1.3 < MIC = 4.14) were sufficient. Floor and ceiling effects were in the acceptable range (< 15%). Score bandings were determined (κ = 0.47); however, the anchor-based MIC could not be calculated owing to an insufficient anchor.

Conclusions: PRIDD is a valid and reliable tool to evaluate the impact of dermatological disease on people's lives in research and clinical practice. It is the first dermatology-specific PROM to meet the COSMIN criteria. These results support the value of developing and validating PROMs with a patient-centred approach and using classic and modern psychometric methods. Further testing of responsiveness and MIC, cross-cultural translation, linguistic validation and global data collection are planned.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Dermatology
British Journal of Dermatology 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.90%
发文量
1062
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Dermatology (BJD) is committed to publishing the highest quality dermatological research. Through its publications, the journal seeks to advance the understanding, management, and treatment of skin diseases, ultimately aiming to improve patient outcomes.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信