Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Ambulatory and diary methods of self-reported symptoms and well-being have received increasing interest in recent years. These methods are a valuable addition to traditional strategies for the assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in that they capture patients’ recent symptom experiences repeatedly in their natural environments. In this article, we review ways that incorporating diary methods into PRO measurement can facilitate research on quality of life.
Several diary methods are currently available, and they include “real-time” (Ecological Momentary Assessment) and “near-real-time” (end-of-day assessments, Day Reconstruction Method) formats. We identify the key benefits of these methods for PRO research.
(1) In validity testing, diary assessments can serve as a standard for evaluating the ecological validity and for identifying recall biases of PRO instruments with longer-term recall formats. (2) In research and clinical settings, diaries have the ability to closely capture variations and dynamic changes in quality of life that are difficult or not possible to obtain from traditional PRO assessments. (3) In test construction, repeated diary assessments can expand understanding of the measurement characteristics (e.g., reliability, dimensionality) of PROs in that parameters for differences between people can be compared with those for variation within people.
Diary assessment strategies can enrich the repertoire of PRO assessment tools and enhance the measurement of patients’ quality of life.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Stone, A. A., & Shiffman, S. (1994). Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) in behavioral medicine. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 16, 199–202.
Stone, A. A., Schwartz, J. E., Broderick, J. E., & Deaton, A. (2010). A snapshot of the age distribution of psychological well-being in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 9985–9990. CrossRef
Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 16489–16493. CrossRef
Steptoe, A., & Wardle, J. (2011). Positive affect measured using ecological momentary assessment and survival in older men and women. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 18244–18248. CrossRef
Stone, A. A., Shiffman, S., Atienza, A., & Nebling, L. (Eds.). (2007). The science of real-time data capture: Self-reports in health research. New Yrok: Oxford University Press.
Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, J., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 419–435. CrossRef
Bruce, B., & Fries, J. (2005). The health assessment questionnaire (HAQ). Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 23, S14–S18. PubMed
Schwarz, N. (2007). Retrospective and concurrent self-reports: The rationale for real-time data capture. In A. A. Stone, S. S. Shiffman, A. Atienza, & L. Nebeling (Eds.), The science of real-time data capture: Self-reports in health research (pp. 11–26). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ware, J. E. (1993). SF-36 health survey: Manual & interpretive guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.
Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 1179–1194. PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Barrett, L. F. (1997). The relationships among momentary emotion experiences, personality descriptions, and retrospective ratings of emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1100–1110. CrossRef
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. http://www.fda.gov. Accessed March 22, 2010.
Bussmann, J. B., & Ebner-Priemer, U. W. (2012). Ambulatory assessment of movement behavior. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Conner (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 235–250). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Junghaenel, D. U., Schneider, S., Stone, A. A., Christodoulou, C., & Broderick, J. E. (2014). Ecological validity and clinical utility of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS ®) instruments for detecting premenstrual symptoms of depression, anger, and fatigue. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 76, 300–306. PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Murphy, S. L., Smith, D. M., Clauw, D. J., & Alexander, N. B. (2008). The impact of momentary pain and fatigue on physical activity in women with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 59, 849–856. CrossRef
Broderick, J. E., Schneider, S., Junghaenel, D. U., Schwartz, J. E., & Stone, A. A. (2013). Validity and reliability of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) instruments in osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care & Research, 65, 1625–1633.
Dolan, P., & Kudrna, L. (2015). More years, less yawns: Fresh evidence on tiredness by age and other factors. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 70, 576–580.
Van den Brink, M., Bandell-Hoekstra, E., & Abu-Saad, H. H. (2001). The occurrence of recall bias in pediatric headache: A comparison of questionnaire and diary data. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, 41, 11–20. CrossRef
Carney, M. A., Tennen, H., Affleck, G., del Boca, F. K., & Kranzler, H. R. (1998). Levels and patterns of alcohol consumption using timeline follow-back, daily diaries and real-time. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 59, 447–454. CrossRef
Junghaenel, D. U., Cohen, J., Schneider, S., Neerukonda, A. R., & Broderick, J. E. (2015). Identification of distinct fatigue trajectories in patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. Supportive Care in Cancer. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2616-x.
Almeida, D. M. (2005). Resilience and vulnerability to daily stressors assessed via diary methods. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 62–68. CrossRef
Schneider, S., Junghaenel, D. U., Keefe, F. J., Schwartz, J. E., Stone, A. A., & Broderick, J. E. (2012). Individual differences in the day-to-day variability of pain, fatigue, and well-being in patients with rheumatic disease: Associations with psychological variables. Pain, 153, 813–822. PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Nesselroade, J. R., & Ram, N. (2004). Studying intraindividual variability: What we have learned that will help us understand lives in context. Research in Human Development, 1, 9–29. CrossRef
Fayers, P., & Machin, D. (2013). Quality of life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Wichester, West Sussex: Wiley.
Molenaar, P. C. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement, 2, 201–218.
Velicer, W. F., Babbin, S. F., & Palumbo, R. (2014). Idiographic applications: Issues of ergodicity and generalizability. In P. C. M. Molenaar, R. M. Lerner, & K. M. Newell (Eds.), Handbook of developmental systems theory and methodology (pp. 425–441). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Mäkikangas, A., Kinnunen, S., Rantanen, J., Mauno, S., Tolvanen, A., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Association between vigor and exhaustion during the workweek: A person-centered approach to daily assessments. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 27, 555–575. CrossRef
Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., Ching, C. M., Zhang, H., Shen, J., Arias, R. M., et al. (2013). Within-individual variability in self-concepts and personality states: Applying density distribution and situation-behavior approaches across cultures. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 922–935. CrossRef
Roesch, S. C., Aldridge, A. A., Stocking, S. N., Villodas, F., Leung, Q., Bartley, C. E., et al. (2010). Multilevel factor analysis and structural equation modeling of daily diary coping data: Modeling trait and state variation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 767–789. PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Schneider, S., Choi, S. W., Junghaenel, D. U., Schwartz, J. E., & Stone, A. A. (2013). Psychometric characteristics of daily diaries for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS ®): a preliminary investigation. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1859–1869. PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (1996). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 355–371. CrossRef
Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 223–233. CrossRef
Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2012). General random effect latent variable modeling: Random subjects, items, contexts, and parameters. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education.
De Boeck, P. (2008). Random item IRT models. Psychometrika, 73, 533–559. CrossRef
- Ambulatory and diary methods can facilitate the measurement of patient-reported outcomes
Arthur A. Stone
- Springer International Publishing