Skip to main content
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
ZOEKEN
MENU 1 2 3 4
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 5/2018

05-12-2017 | Review

Scoping review of response shift methods: current reporting practices and recommendations

Auteurs: Tolulope T. Sajobi, Ronak Brahmbatt, Lisa M. Lix, Bruno D. Zumbo, Richard Sawatzky

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2018

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
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Background

Response shift (RS) has been defined as a change in the meaning of an individual’s self-evaluation of his/her health status and quality of life. Several statistical model- and design-based methods have been developed to test for RS in longitudinal data. We reviewed the uptake of these methods in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) literature.

Methods

CINHAHL, EMBASE, Medline, ProQuest, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched to identify English-language articles about RS published until 2016. Data on year and country of publication, PRO measure adopted, RS detection method, type of RS detected, and testing of underlying model assumptions were extracted from the included articles.

Results

Of the 1032 articles identified, 101 (9.8%) articles were included in the study. While 54.5 of the articles reported on the Then-test, 30.7% of the articles reported on Oort’s or Schmitt’s structural equation modeling (SEM) procedure. Newer RS detection methods, such as relative importance analysis and random forest regression, have been used less frequently. Less than 25% reported on testing the assumptions underlying the adopted RS detection method(s).

Conclusions

Despite rapid methodological advancements in RS research, this review highlights the need for further research about RS detection methods for complex longitudinal data and standardized reporting guidelines.
vorige artikel Quality of life among parents of preterm infants: a scoping review
volgende artikel COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures

Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:

BSL Podotherapeut Totaal

Binnen de bundel kunt u gebruik maken van boeken, tijdschriften, e-learnings, web-tv's en uitlegvideo's. BSL Podotherapeut Totaal is overal toegankelijk; via uw PC, tablet of smartphone.

Meer informatie
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Revicki, D. A. (1989). Health-related quality of life in the evaluation of medical therapy for chronic illness. Journal of Family Practice, 29(4), 377–380. PubMed
2.
Berzon, R., Hays, R. D., & Shumaker, S. A. (1993). International use, application and performance of health-related quality of life instruments. Quality of Life Research, 2(6), 367–368. CrossRefPubMed
3.
Deshpande, P. R., Rajan, S., Sudeepthi, B. L., & Abdul Nazir, C. P. (2011). Patient-reported outcomes: A new era in clinical research. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 2(4), 137–144. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Golembiewski, R. T., Billingsley, K., & Yeager, S. (1976). Measuring change and persistence in human affairs: Types of change generated by OD designs. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 12, 133–157. CrossRef
5.
Howard, G. S., Ralph, K. M., Gulanick, N. A., Maxwell, S. E., Nance, S. W., & Gerber, S. K. (1979). Internal invalidity in pretest-posttest self-report evaluations and reevaluation of retrospective pretests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 1–23. CrossRef
6.
Breetvelt, I. S., & Van Dam, F. S. (1991). Underreporting by cancer patients: the case of response-shift. Social Science and Medicine, 32, 981–987. CrossRefPubMed
7.
Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515. CrossRefPubMed
8.
Taminiau-Bloem, E. F., van Zuuren, F. J., Visser, M. R. M., Tishelman, C., Schwartz, C. E., Koeneman, M. A., et al. (2011) Opening the black box of cancer patients’ quality-of-life change assessments: a think-aloud study examining the cognitive processes underlying responses to transition items. Psychol Health, 26( 11), 1414–1428. CrossRefPubMed
9.
Schwartz, C. E., Andresen, E. M., Nosek, M. A., & Krahn, G. L. & RRCT Expert Panel on Health Status Measurement. (2007). Response shift theory: Important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88(4), 529–536. CrossRefPubMed
10.
Schwartz, C. E. (2010). Application of response shift theory and methods to participation measurement: A brief history of a young field. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91(9), S38–S43. CrossRefPubMed
11.
Rapkin, B. D., & Schwartz, C. E. (2004). Toward a theoretical model of quality-of-life appraisal: Implications of findings from studies of response shift. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 2, 14. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Schwartz, C. E., Bode, R., Repucci, N., Becker, J., Sprangers, M. A., & Fayers, P. M. (2006). The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: A meta-analysis of response shift. Quality of Life Research, 15(9), 1533–1550. CrossRefPubMed
13.
Sawatzky, R., Sajobi, T. T., Brahmbhatt, R., Chan, E. K. H., Lix, L. M., & Zumbo, B. D. (2017). Longitudinal change in response processes: A response shift perspective. In B. D. Zumbo & A. M. Hubley (Eds.), Understanding and investigating response processes in validation research (pp. 251–276). New York: Springer. CrossRef
14.
Balanin, B., Ennis, O., Kanes, G., Siinghal, R., Roberts, S. N., Rees, D., et al. (2009). Response shift in self-reported functional scores after knee microfracture for full thickness cartilage lesions. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 17(8), 1009–1013. CrossRef
15.
Sajobi, T. T., Fiest, K. M., & Wiebe, S. (2014). Changes in quality of life after epilepsy surgery: the role of reprioritization response shift. Epilepsia, 55(9), 1331–1338. CrossRefPubMed
16.
Vanier, A., Falissard, B., Sébille, V., & Hardouin, J. B. (2017). The complexity of interpreting changes observed over time in health-related quality of life: A short overview of 15 years of research on response shift theory. In F. Guillemin, A. Leplège, S. Briançon, E. Spitz & J. Coste (Eds.), Perceived health and adaptation in chronic disease. Stakes and future challenge (pp. 202–230). New York, NY: CRC Press.
17.
Bray, J. H., Maxwell, S. E., & Howard, G. S. (1984). Methods of analysis with response-shift bias. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44(4), 781–804. CrossRef
18.
Schmitt, N. (1982). The use of analysis of covariance structures to assess beta and gamma change. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 343–358. CrossRefPubMed
19.
Oort, F. J. (2005). Using structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 587–598. CrossRefPubMed
20.
Oort, F. J., Visser, M. R. M., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2005). An application of structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change in quality of life data from cancer patients undergoing invasive surgery. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 599–609. CrossRefPubMed
21.
Anota, A., Bascoul-Mollevi, C., Conroy, T., Guillemin, F., Velten, M., Jolly, D., et al. (2014). Item response theory and factor analysis as a mean to characterize occurrence of response shift in a longitudinal quality of life study in breast cancer patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 12, 32. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Guilleux, A., Blanchin, M., Vanier, A., Guillemin, F., Falissard, B., Schwartz, C. E., et al. (2015). RespOnse Shift ALgorithm in Item response theory (ROSALI) for response shift detection with missing data in longitudinal patient-reported outcome studies. Quality of Life Research, 24(3), 553–564. CrossRefPubMed
23.
Lowy, A., & Bernhard, J. (2004). Quantitative assessment of changes in patients’ constructs of quality of life: an application of multilevel models. Quality of Life Research, 13(7), 1177–1185. CrossRefPubMed
24.
Mayo, N. E., Scott, S. C., Dendukuri, N., Ahmed, S., & Wood-Dauphinee, S. (2008). Identifying response shift statistically at the individual level. Quality of Life Research, 17(4), 627–639. CrossRefPubMed
25.
Lix, L. M., Sajobi, T. T., Sawatzky, R., Liu, J., Mayo, N. E., Huang, Y., et al. (2013). Relative importance measures for reprioritization response shift. Quality of Life Research, 22(4), 695–703. CrossRefPubMed
26.
Li, Y., & Rapkin, B. (2009). Classification and regression tree uncovered hierarchy of psychosocial determinants underlying quality-of-life response shift in HIV/AIDS. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(11), 1138–1147. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Boucekine, M., Loundou, A., Baumstarck, K., Minaya-Flores, P., Pelletier, J., Ghattas, B., et al. (2013). Using the random forest method to detect a response shift in the quality of life of multiple sclerosis patients: a cohort study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, 20. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Verdam, M. G. E., Oort, F. J., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2016). Using structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change in discrete variables: an application to the items of the SF-36. Quality of Life Research, 25(6), 1361–1383. CrossRefPubMed
29.
Vanier, A., Sebille, V., Blanchin, M., Guilleaux, A., & Hardouin, J. (2015). Overall performance of Oort’s procedure for response shift detection at item-level. Quality of Life Research, 24(8), 1799–1807. CrossRefPubMed
30.
Ahmed, S., Sawatzky, R., Levesque, J. F., Ehrmann-Feldman, D., & Schwartz, C. E. (2014). Minimal evidence of response shift in the absence of a catalyst. Quality of Life Research, 23(9), 2421–2430. CrossRefPubMed
31.
Joyce, C. R. B., O’Boyle, C., & McGee, H. (1999). Individual quality of life: Approaches to conceptualization and assessment. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.
32.
Schwartz, C. E., & Sprangers, M. A. (1999). Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1531–1548. CrossRefPubMed
33.
Ahmed, S., Mayo, N. E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Hanley, J. A., & Cohen, R. S. (2005). Using the patient generated index to evaluate response shift post-stroke. Quality of Life Research, 14(10), 2247–2257. CrossRefPubMed
34.
Ahmed, S., Mayo, N. E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Hanley, J. A., & Cohen, S. R. (2005). The structural equation modeling technique did not show a response shift, contrary to the results of the then test and the individualized approaches. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(11), 1125–1133. CrossRefPubMed
35.
Visser, M. R., Oort, F. J., & Sprangers, M. A. (2005). Methods to detect response shift in quality of life data: A convergent validity study. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 629–639. CrossRefPubMed
36.
Mayo, N. E., Scott, S. C., Bernstein, C. N., & Lix, L. M. (2015). How are you? Do people with inflammatory bowel disease experience response shift on this question? Health Qual Life Outcomes, 13, 52. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Lix, L. M., Chan, E. K. H., Sawatzky, R., Sajobi, T. T., Liu, J., Hopman, W., et al. (2016). Response shift and disease activity in inflammatory bowel disease. Quality of Life Research, 25(7), 1751–1760. CrossRefPubMed
38.
Schwartz, C. E., Ahmed, S., Sawatzky, R., Sajobi, T., Mayo, N., Finkelstein, J., et al. (2013). Guidelines for secondary analysis in search of response shift. Quality of Life Research, 22(10), 2663–2673. CrossRefPubMed
39.
Ware, J. E. Jr., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1994). SF-36 physical and mental scales: A user’s manual. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.
40.
Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Jansen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L. Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Beaumont, J. L., Lix, L. M., Yost, K. J., & Hahn, E. A. (2006). Application of robust statistical methods for sensitivity analysis of health-related quality of life outcomes. Quality of Life Research, 15(3), 349–356. CrossRefPubMed
42.
Grewal, R., Cote, J. A., & Baumgartner, H. (2004). Multicollinearity and measurement error in structural equation models: Implications for theory testing. Marketing Science, 23(4), 519–529. CrossRef
43.
Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38(1), 171–189. CrossRef
44.
Schwartz, C. E., Sajobi, T. T., Verdam, M. G., Sebille, V., Lix, L. M., Guilleux, A., et al. (2015). Method variation in the impact of missing data on response shift detection. Quality of Life Research, 24(3), 521–528. CrossRefPubMed
45.
Sajobi, T. T., Lix, L. M., Singh, G., Lowerison, M., Engbers, J., & Mayo, N. E. (2015). Identifying reprioritization response shift in a stroke caregiver population: A comparison of missing data methods. Quality of Life Research, 24(3), 529–540. CrossRefPubMed
46.
Verdam, M. G., Oort, F. J., van der Linden, Y. M., & Sprangers, M. A. (2015). Taking into account the impact of attrition on the assessment of response shift and true change: A multigroup structural equation modeling approach. Quality of Life Research, 24(3), 541–551. CrossRefPubMed
47.
Blanchin, M., Sebille, V., Guilleux, A., & Hardouin, J. (2016). The Guttman errors as a tool for response shift detection at subgroup and item levels. Quality of Life Research, 25(6), 1385–1393. CrossRefPubMed
48.
Schwartz, C. E. (2016). Introduction to special section on response shift at the item level. Quality of Life Research, 25(6), 1323–1325. CrossRefPubMed
49.
Verdam, M. G. E., Oort, F. J., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2017). Structural equation modeling-based effect-size indices were used to evaluate and interpret the impact of response shift effects. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 85, 37–44. CrossRefPubMed
50.
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. A. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
51.
Jobe, J. B. (2003). Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods. Quality of Life Research, 12, 219–227. CrossRefPubMed
52.
53.
Hubley, A. M., & Zumbo, B. D. (2011). Validity and the consequences of test interpretation and use. Social Indicators Research, 103(2), 219–230. CrossRef
54.
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749. CrossRef
55.
Zumbo, B. D., & Chan, E. K. H. (2014). Reflections on validation practices in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. In B. D. Zumbo & E. K. H. Chan (Eds.), Validity and validation in social, behavioral, and health sciences (Vol. 54, pp. 321–327). New York: Springer International Publishing.
56.
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P., STROBE Initiative. (2008). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(4), 344–349. CrossRef
57.
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D., for the CONSORT Group. (2010). CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Annals of Internal Medicine, 152(11), 726–732. CrossRefPubMed
58.
StataCorp. (2015). Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
59.
SAS Institute Inc. (2014). SAS/ STAT version 9.4. Cary, NC: AS Institute Inc.
60.
R Core Team. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
61.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2011). Mplus user’s guide (6th Edn.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Metagegevens
Titel
Scoping review of response shift methods: current reporting practices and recommendations
Auteurs
Tolulope T. Sajobi
Ronak Brahmbatt
Lisa M. Lix
Bruno D. Zumbo
Richard Sawatzky
Publicatiedatum
05-12-2017
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1751-x

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2018

Quality of Life Research 5/2018 Naar de uitgave

Correction

Correction to: Norwegian reference values for the Short-Form Health Survey 36: development over time

OriginalPaper

Norwegian reference values for the Short-Form Health Survey 36: development over time

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life among US military personnel injured in combat: findings from the Wounded Warrior Recovery Project

OriginalPaper

Association of midlife value priorities with health-related quality of life, frailty and mortality among older men: a 26-year follow-up of the Helsinki Businessmen Study (HBS)

OriginalPaper

Measuring health related quality of life (HRQoL) in community and facility-based care settings with the interRAI assessment instruments: development of a crosswalk to HUI3

OriginalPaper

COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study

Version: 0.1954.0