Cargando…

A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments

OBJECTIVES: This proof of concept (POC) study was designed to evaluate the use of an Internet-based bulletin board technology to aid parallel cross-cultural development of thematic content for a new set of patient-reported outcome measures (PROs). METHODS: The POC study, conducted in Germany and the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Atkinson, Mark J, Lohs, Jan, Kuhagen, Ilka, Kaufman, Julie, Bhaidani, Shamsu
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1630423/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16995935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-64
_version_ 1782130623787302912
author Atkinson, Mark J
Lohs, Jan
Kuhagen, Ilka
Kaufman, Julie
Bhaidani, Shamsu
author_facet Atkinson, Mark J
Lohs, Jan
Kuhagen, Ilka
Kaufman, Julie
Bhaidani, Shamsu
author_sort Atkinson, Mark J
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This proof of concept (POC) study was designed to evaluate the use of an Internet-based bulletin board technology to aid parallel cross-cultural development of thematic content for a new set of patient-reported outcome measures (PROs). METHODS: The POC study, conducted in Germany and the United States, utilized Internet Focus Groups (IFGs) to assure the validity of new PRO items across the two cultures – all items were designed to assess the impact of excess facial oil on individuals' lives. The on-line IFG activities were modeled after traditional face-to-face focus groups and organized by a common 'Topic' Guide designed with input from thought leaders in dermatology and health outcomes research. The two sets of IFGs were professionally moderated in the native language of each country. IFG moderators coded the thematic content of transcripts, and a frequency analysis of code endorsement was used to identify areas of content similarity and difference between the two countries. Based on this information, draft PRO items were designed and a majority (80%) of the original participants returned to rate the relative importance of the newly designed questions. FINDINGS: The use of parallel cross-cultural content analysis of IFG transcripts permitted identification of the major content themes in each country as well as exploration of the possible reasons for any observed differences between the countries. Results from coded frequency counts and transcript reviews informed the design and wording of the test questions for the future PRO instrument(s). Subsequent ratings of item importance also deepened our understanding of potential areas of cross-cultural difference, differences that would be explored over the course of future validation studies involving these PROs. CONCLUSION: The use of IFGs for cross-cultural content development received positive reviews from participants and was found to be both cost and time effective. The novel thematic coding methodology provided an empirical platform on which to develop culturally sensitive questionnaire content using the natural language of participants. Overall, the IFG responses and thematic analyses provided a thorough evaluation of similarities and differences in cross-cultural themes, which in turn acted as a sound base for the development of new PRO questionnaires.
format Text
id pubmed-1630423
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-16304232006-11-01 A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments Atkinson, Mark J Lohs, Jan Kuhagen, Ilka Kaufman, Julie Bhaidani, Shamsu Health Qual Life Outcomes Research OBJECTIVES: This proof of concept (POC) study was designed to evaluate the use of an Internet-based bulletin board technology to aid parallel cross-cultural development of thematic content for a new set of patient-reported outcome measures (PROs). METHODS: The POC study, conducted in Germany and the United States, utilized Internet Focus Groups (IFGs) to assure the validity of new PRO items across the two cultures – all items were designed to assess the impact of excess facial oil on individuals' lives. The on-line IFG activities were modeled after traditional face-to-face focus groups and organized by a common 'Topic' Guide designed with input from thought leaders in dermatology and health outcomes research. The two sets of IFGs were professionally moderated in the native language of each country. IFG moderators coded the thematic content of transcripts, and a frequency analysis of code endorsement was used to identify areas of content similarity and difference between the two countries. Based on this information, draft PRO items were designed and a majority (80%) of the original participants returned to rate the relative importance of the newly designed questions. FINDINGS: The use of parallel cross-cultural content analysis of IFG transcripts permitted identification of the major content themes in each country as well as exploration of the possible reasons for any observed differences between the countries. Results from coded frequency counts and transcript reviews informed the design and wording of the test questions for the future PRO instrument(s). Subsequent ratings of item importance also deepened our understanding of potential areas of cross-cultural difference, differences that would be explored over the course of future validation studies involving these PROs. CONCLUSION: The use of IFGs for cross-cultural content development received positive reviews from participants and was found to be both cost and time effective. The novel thematic coding methodology provided an empirical platform on which to develop culturally sensitive questionnaire content using the natural language of participants. Overall, the IFG responses and thematic analyses provided a thorough evaluation of similarities and differences in cross-cultural themes, which in turn acted as a sound base for the development of new PRO questionnaires. BioMed Central 2006-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC1630423/ /pubmed/16995935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-64 Text en Copyright © 2006 Atkinson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Atkinson, Mark J
Lohs, Jan
Kuhagen, Ilka
Kaufman, Julie
Bhaidani, Shamsu
A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments
title A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments
title_full A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments
title_fullStr A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments
title_full_unstemmed A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments
title_short A promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of Internet-based focus groups for content validation of new Patient Reported Outcome assessments
title_sort promising method for identifying cross-cultural differences in patient perspective: the use of internet-based focus groups for content validation of new patient reported outcome assessments
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1630423/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16995935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-64
work_keys_str_mv AT atkinsonmarkj apromisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT lohsjan apromisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT kuhagenilka apromisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT kaufmanjulie apromisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT bhaidanishamsu apromisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT atkinsonmarkj promisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT lohsjan promisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT kuhagenilka promisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT kaufmanjulie promisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments
AT bhaidanishamsu promisingmethodforidentifyingcrossculturaldifferencesinpatientperspectivetheuseofinternetbasedfocusgroupsforcontentvalidationofnewpatientreportedoutcomeassessments