Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 5/2008

01-06-2008

Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: a qualitative analysis of focus-group data

Auteurs: Liana D. Castel, Kelly A. Williams, Hayden B. Bosworth, Susan V. Eisen, Elizabeth A. Hahn, Debra E. Irwin, Morgen A. R. Kelly, Jennifer Morse, Angela Stover, Darren A. DeWalt, Robert F. DeVellis

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2008

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Purpose

Our aim was to assess the content validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) social health item banks by comparing a prespecified conceptual model with concepts that focus-group participants identified as important social-health-related outcomes. These data will inform the process of improving health-related quality-of-life measures.

Methods

Twenty-five patients with a range of social limitations due to chronic health conditions were recruited at two sites; four focus groups were conducted. Raters independently classified participants’ statements using a hierarchical, nested schema that included health-related outcomes, role performance, role satisfaction, family/friends, work, and leisure.

Results

Key themes that emerged were fulfilling both family and work responsibilities and the distinction between activities done out of responsibility versus enjoyment. Although focus-group participants identified volunteerism and pet ownership as important social-health-related concepts, these were not in our original conceptual model. The concept of satisfaction was often found to overlap with the concept of performance.

Conclusion

Our conceptual model appears comprehensive but is being further refined to more appropriately (a) distinguish between responsibilities versus discretionary activities, and (b) situate the outcome of satisfaction as it relates to impairment in social and other domains of health.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Food and Drug Administration. (2006). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims (DRAFT). US Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration; Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER); Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER); Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), February 2006. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/CDER/GUIDANCE/5460dft.pdf. Accessed December 18, 2007. Food and Drug Administration. (2006). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims (DRAFT). US Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration; Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER); Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER); Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), February 2006. Available from: http://​www.​fda.​gov/​CDER/​GUIDANCE/​5460dft.​pdf. Accessed December 18, 2007.
2.
go back to reference Cella, D., Yount, S., et al. (2007). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S3–S11.PubMedCrossRef Cella, D., Yount, S., et al. (2007). The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S3–S11.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., et al. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S12–S21.PubMedCrossRef DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., et al. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S12–S21.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference World Health Organization. (1946). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization. World Health Organization. (1946). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization.
5.
go back to reference World Health Organization. (2001). ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization. World Health Organization. (2001). ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.
6.
go back to reference Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.PubMedCrossRef Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Birchwood, M., Smith, J., et al. (1990). The Social functioning scale. The development and validation of a new scale of social adjustment for use in family intervention programmes with schizophrenic patients. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 853–859.PubMedCrossRef Birchwood, M., Smith, J., et al. (1990). The Social functioning scale. The development and validation of a new scale of social adjustment for use in family intervention programmes with schizophrenic patients. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 853–859.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dijkers, M. P., Whiteneck, G., et al. (2000). Measures of social outcomes in disability research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 81(12 Suppl 2), S63–S80.PubMedCrossRef Dijkers, M. P., Whiteneck, G., et al. (2000). Measures of social outcomes in disability research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 81(12 Suppl 2), S63–S80.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Eisen, S. V., Normand, S. L. T., et al. (1994). BASIS-32 and the Revised Behavioral Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R). In M. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcome assessment (pp. 759–790). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Eisen, S. V., Normand, S. L. T., et al. (1994). BASIS-32 and the Revised Behavioral Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R). In M. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcome assessment (pp. 759–790). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
go back to reference Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., et al. (1988). Inventory of interpersonal problems: psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 885–892.PubMedCrossRef Horowitz, L. M., Rosenberg, S. E., et al. (1988). Inventory of interpersonal problems: psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 885–892.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Weissman, M. M., & Bothwell, S. (1976). Assessment of social adjustment by patient self-report. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33(9), 1111–1115.PubMed Weissman, M. M., & Bothwell, S. (1976). Assessment of social adjustment by patient self-report. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33(9), 1111–1115.PubMed
12.
go back to reference World Health Organization. (2000). Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHO DAS II) Interviewer’s training manual. Geneva. World Health Organization. (2000). Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHO DAS II) Interviewer’s training manual. Geneva.
13.
go back to reference McDowell, I., & Newell, C. (1996). Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. McDowell, I., & Newell, C. (1996). Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
go back to reference Cohen, S., & Syme, S. L. (1985). Issues in the study, application of social support. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 3–22). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc. Cohen, S., & Syme, S. L. (1985). Issues in the study, application of social support. In S. Cohen & S. L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 3–22). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.
15.
go back to reference McCampbell, C., & Helmer, O. (1993). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467. McCampbell, C., & Helmer, O. (1993). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467.
16.
go back to reference Hahn, E., Cella, D., et al. (1991). Social well-being: The forgotten health status measure. Quality of Life Research, 14(9). Hahn, E., Cella, D., et al. (1991). Social well-being: The forgotten health status measure. Quality of Life Research, 14(9).
17.
go back to reference Curtis, E., & Redmond, R. (2007). Focus groups in nursing research. Nurse Res, 14(2), 25–37.PubMed Curtis, E., & Redmond, R. (2007). Focus groups in nursing research. Nurse Res, 14(2), 25–37.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Krueger, R. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Krueger, R. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
go back to reference Morgan, D. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Qualitative research methods (Vol 16). Newbury Park: Sage. Morgan, D. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Qualitative research methods (Vol 16). Newbury Park: Sage.
20.
go back to reference Morgan, D. (Ed.). (1993). Successful focus groups: advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park: Sage. Morgan, D. (Ed.). (1993). Successful focus groups: advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park: Sage.
21.
go back to reference Stewart, D., Shamdasani, P., et al. (2007). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Stewart, D., Shamdasani, P., et al. (2007). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
22.
go back to reference Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ, 311(7000), 299–302.PubMed Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ, 311(7000), 299–302.PubMed
23.
go back to reference Bender, D., & Ewbank, D. (1994). The focus group as a tool for health research: Issues in design and analysis. Health Transition Review, 4(1), 63–79.PubMed Bender, D., & Ewbank, D. (1994). The focus group as a tool for health research: Issues in design and analysis. Health Transition Review, 4(1), 63–79.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Muhr, T. (2004). User’s manual for ATLAS.ti 5.0. GmbH, Berlin: ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development. Muhr, T. (2004). User’s manual for ATLAS.ti 5.0. GmbH, Berlin: ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development.
25.
go back to reference Carey, J. W., Morgan, M., et al. (1996). Intercoder agreement in analysis of responses to open-ended interview questions: Examples from tuberculosis research. Field Methods, 8(3), 1–5.CrossRef Carey, J. W., Morgan, M., et al. (1996). Intercoder agreement in analysis of responses to open-ended interview questions: Examples from tuberculosis research. Field Methods, 8(3), 1–5.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Gorden, R. L. (1992). Basic interviewing skills. Long Grove: Waveland Press. Gorden, R. L. (1992). Basic interviewing skills. Long Grove: Waveland Press.
27.
go back to reference Kupper, L. L., & Hafner, K. B. (1989). On assessing interrater agreement for multiple attribute responses. Biometrics, 45(3), 957–967.PubMedCrossRef Kupper, L. L., & Hafner, K. B. (1989). On assessing interrater agreement for multiple attribute responses. Biometrics, 45(3), 957–967.PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Herrald, M. M., Herrald, M. M., et al. (2002). Pet ownership predicts adherence to cardiovascular rehabilitation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(6), 1107–1123.CrossRef Herrald, M. M., Herrald, M. M., et al. (2002). Pet ownership predicts adherence to cardiovascular rehabilitation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(6), 1107–1123.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Frost, M. H., Reeve, B. B., et al. (2007). What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures? Value Health, 10 (Suppl 2), S94–S105.PubMedCrossRef Frost, M. H., Reeve, B. B., et al. (2007). What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures? Value Health, 10 (Suppl 2), S94–S105.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Ustun, T., Chatterji, S., et al. (Eds.). (2001). Disability and culture: Universalism and diversity. Gottingen: World Health Organization. Ustun, T., Chatterji, S., et al. (Eds.). (2001). Disability and culture: Universalism and diversity. Gottingen: World Health Organization.
Metagegevens
Titel
Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: a qualitative analysis of focus-group data
Auteurs
Liana D. Castel
Kelly A. Williams
Hayden B. Bosworth
Susan V. Eisen
Elizabeth A. Hahn
Debra E. Irwin
Morgen A. R. Kelly
Jennifer Morse
Angela Stover
Darren A. DeWalt
Robert F. DeVellis
Publicatiedatum
01-06-2008
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2008
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9352-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2008

Quality of Life Research 5/2008 Naar de uitgave