Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Measuring constructs such as mobility with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can enhance clinical and scientific understanding of how health conditions, like lower limb amputation, impact patients’ lives. When developing PRO questionnaires, cognitive interviews (CIs) are used to examine whether survey items are understandable, clear, and meaningful. The aim of this study was to use CIs to inform item development for the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M), a PRO that measures mobility in prosthetic limb users.
Thirty-six CIs were conducted with 30 prosthetic limb users. Each participant responded to up to 30 items from the PLUS-M candidate item set. Each item was reviewed by a minimum of five participants who differed in self-reported mobility, literacy, level of amputation, and time since amputation. Items were revised based on participant feedback, and substantially revised items were re-evaluated through additional CIs.
Feedback from CIs identified substantial issues in 76 of the total 156 items. These items were subsequently modified or eliminated.
Cognitive interviews were an essential qualitative step in the development of the PLUS-M item bank and resulted in better functioning items.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Deathe, A. B., & Miller, W. C. (2005). The L test of functional mobility: Measurement properties of a modified version of the timed “up & go” test designed for people with lower-limb amputations. Physical Therapy, 85(7), 626–635. PubMed
Amtmann, D., Cook, K. F., Johnson, K. L., & Cella, D. (2011). The PROMIS initiative: Involvement of rehabilitation stakeholders in development and examples of applications in rehabilitation research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(10 Suppl), S12–S19. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.04.025. PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Condie, E., Scott, H., & Treweek, S. (2006). Lower limb prosthetic outcome measures: A review of the literature 1995 to 2005. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 18(6), P13. CrossRef
Willis, G. B. (1999). Cognitive interviewing: A “how to” guide. Course manual prepared for a short course at the 1999 Meeting of the American Statistical Association: Research Triangle Institute.
Collins, D. (2003). Pretesting survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 12(3), 229–238. CrossRef
Jobe, J. B. (2003). Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 12(3), 219–227. CrossRef
Presser, S., Couper, M. P., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., Martin, J., Rothgeb, J. M., et al. (2004). Methods for testing and evaluating survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 109–130. CrossRef
Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Incorporated.
Gershon, R. C., Lai, J. S., Bode, R., Choi, S., Moy, C., Bleck, T., et al. (2012). Neuro-QOL: Quality of life item banks for adults with neurological disorders: Item development and calibrations based upon clinical and general population testing. Quality of Life Research, 21(3), 475–486. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9958-8. PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS ®). (2012). PROMIS ® instrument development and psychometric evaluation scientific standards. http://www.nihpromis.org/Documents/PROMIS_Standards_050212.pdf. Accessed 19 Mar 2013.
Franchignoni, F., Giordano, A., Ferriero, G., Orlandini, D., Amoresano, A., & Perucca, L. (2007). Measuring mobility in people with lower limb amputation: Rasch analysis of the mobility section of the prosthesis evaluation questionnaire. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 39(2), 138–144. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0033. PubMedCrossRef
Stenner, A. J., Horablin, I., Smith, D. R., & Smith, M. (1988). The Lexile framework. Durham, NC: MetaMetrics. Inc.
US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS). (2009). Guidance for industry. Patient- reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims (US FDA guidance for industry related to the development and review of PRO measures). Retrieved from www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatory Information/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2010.
Patrick, D. L., Burke, L. B., Gwaltney, C. J., Leidy, N. K., Martin, M. L., Molsen, E., et al. (2011). Content validity—Establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: Part 2—Assessing respondent understanding. Value in Health, 14(8), 978–988. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013. PubMedCrossRef
Wilkerson, G. S., & Robertson, G. J. (2006). WRAT4 wide range achievement test professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.
Davis, T. C., Long, S. W., Jackson, R. H., Mayeaux, E. J., George, R. B., Murphy, P. W., et al. (1993). Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: A shortened screening instrument. Family Medicine, 25(6), 391–395. PubMed
- Use of cognitive interviews in the development of the PLUS-M item bank
Sara J. Morgan
Daniel C. Abrahamson
Andre J. Kajlich
Brian J. Hafner
- Springer International Publishing