开放式症状框架的介绍和验证:用于测量癌症及其治疗相关症状的患者报告模块化公共领域框架。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Quality of Life Research Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1007/s11136-024-03656-6
C Gibbons, G Brown, S C Lu, A Elrick, Y Tang, M Kaufman, M Williams, C Xu, C Harrison, C Swisher
{"title":"开放式症状框架的介绍和验证:用于测量癌症及其治疗相关症状的患者报告模块化公共领域框架。","authors":"C Gibbons, G Brown, S C Lu, A Elrick, Y Tang, M Kaufman, M Williams, C Xu, C Harrison, C Swisher","doi":"10.1007/s11136-024-03656-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We provide an initial description and validation of some public domain patient-reported outcome (PRO) items to assess cancer symptom burden to address immediate barriers to symptom assessment use in clinical practice and facilitate future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created the Open Symptom Framework (OSF), a flexible tool for clinical cancer-related symptom assessment. The items comprise six components: recall period, concept, symptom, qualifier(s), a definition, and a 5-point Likert-type response. We recruited patients receiving cancer therapy in the United States and United Kingdom. We assessed external construct validity by comparing OSF scores to the PRO-CTCAE measure and assessed reliability, scalability, dimensionality, and item ordering within a non-parametric item response theory framework. We tested differential item functioning for country, age, gender, and level of education.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We developed a framework alongside clinical and psychometric experts and debrieifed with 10 patients. For validation, we recruited 331patients. All items correlated with the PRO-CTCAE equivalents (r = 0.55-0.96, all p < 0.01). Mokken analysis confirmed the scalability and unidimensionality of all symptom scales with multiple items at the scale (Ho = 0.61-0.75) and item level (Hi = 0.60-0.76). Items are interpreted consistently between demographic groups (Crit = 0 for all groups).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The public domain OSF has excellent psychometric properties including face, content, and criterion validity and can facilitate the development of flexible, robust measurements to fulfil stakeholder need. The OSF was designed specifically to support clinical assessment but will function well for research. Further work is planned to increase the number of symptoms and number of questions per symptom within the framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11390769/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction and validation of the open symptom framework: a public domain modular framework for patient-reported measurement of symptoms related to cancer and its treatment.\",\"authors\":\"C Gibbons, G Brown, S C Lu, A Elrick, Y Tang, M Kaufman, M Williams, C Xu, C Harrison, C Swisher\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11136-024-03656-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We provide an initial description and validation of some public domain patient-reported outcome (PRO) items to assess cancer symptom burden to address immediate barriers to symptom assessment use in clinical practice and facilitate future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created the Open Symptom Framework (OSF), a flexible tool for clinical cancer-related symptom assessment. The items comprise six components: recall period, concept, symptom, qualifier(s), a definition, and a 5-point Likert-type response. We recruited patients receiving cancer therapy in the United States and United Kingdom. We assessed external construct validity by comparing OSF scores to the PRO-CTCAE measure and assessed reliability, scalability, dimensionality, and item ordering within a non-parametric item response theory framework. We tested differential item functioning for country, age, gender, and level of education.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We developed a framework alongside clinical and psychometric experts and debrieifed with 10 patients. For validation, we recruited 331patients. All items correlated with the PRO-CTCAE equivalents (r = 0.55-0.96, all p < 0.01). Mokken analysis confirmed the scalability and unidimensionality of all symptom scales with multiple items at the scale (Ho = 0.61-0.75) and item level (Hi = 0.60-0.76). Items are interpreted consistently between demographic groups (Crit = 0 for all groups).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The public domain OSF has excellent psychometric properties including face, content, and criterion validity and can facilitate the development of flexible, robust measurements to fulfil stakeholder need. The OSF was designed specifically to support clinical assessment but will function well for research. Further work is planned to increase the number of symptoms and number of questions per symptom within the framework.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality of Life Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11390769/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality of Life Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-024-03656-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-024-03656-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们对一些公共领域的患者报告结果(PRO)项目进行了初步描述和验证,以评估癌症症状负担,从而解决临床实践中使用症状评估的直接障碍,并促进未来的研究:我们创建了开放式症状框架(OSF),这是一种灵活的临床癌症相关症状评估工具。这些项目由六个部分组成:回忆期、概念、症状、修饰语、定义和 5 点李克特反应。我们在美国和英国招募了接受癌症治疗的患者。我们将 OSF 分数与 PRO-CTCAE 测量进行了比较,从而评估了外部构建有效性,并在非参数项目反应理论框架内评估了可靠性、可扩展性、维度和项目排序。我们测试了不同国家、年龄、性别和教育水平的项目功能:我们与临床和心理测量专家一起制定了一个框架,并对 10 名患者进行了测试。为了进行验证,我们招募了 331 名患者。所有项目均与 PRO-CTCAE 等值相关(r = 0.55-0.96,均为 p):公共领域的 OSF 具有良好的心理测量特性,包括面效、内容效能和标准效用,可以促进灵活、稳健的测量方法的开发,以满足利益相关者的需求。OSF 是专门为支持临床评估而设计的,但在研究中也能发挥良好的作用。我们计划进一步开展工作,以增加该框架中的症状数量和每个症状的问题数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Introduction and validation of the open symptom framework: a public domain modular framework for patient-reported measurement of symptoms related to cancer and its treatment.

Introduction and validation of the open symptom framework: a public domain modular framework for patient-reported measurement of symptoms related to cancer and its treatment.

Purpose: We provide an initial description and validation of some public domain patient-reported outcome (PRO) items to assess cancer symptom burden to address immediate barriers to symptom assessment use in clinical practice and facilitate future research.

Methods: We created the Open Symptom Framework (OSF), a flexible tool for clinical cancer-related symptom assessment. The items comprise six components: recall period, concept, symptom, qualifier(s), a definition, and a 5-point Likert-type response. We recruited patients receiving cancer therapy in the United States and United Kingdom. We assessed external construct validity by comparing OSF scores to the PRO-CTCAE measure and assessed reliability, scalability, dimensionality, and item ordering within a non-parametric item response theory framework. We tested differential item functioning for country, age, gender, and level of education.

Results: We developed a framework alongside clinical and psychometric experts and debrieifed with 10 patients. For validation, we recruited 331patients. All items correlated with the PRO-CTCAE equivalents (r = 0.55-0.96, all p < 0.01). Mokken analysis confirmed the scalability and unidimensionality of all symptom scales with multiple items at the scale (Ho = 0.61-0.75) and item level (Hi = 0.60-0.76). Items are interpreted consistently between demographic groups (Crit = 0 for all groups).

Conclusion: The public domain OSF has excellent psychometric properties including face, content, and criterion validity and can facilitate the development of flexible, robust measurements to fulfil stakeholder need. The OSF was designed specifically to support clinical assessment but will function well for research. Further work is planned to increase the number of symptoms and number of questions per symptom within the framework.

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
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
×
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