Cargando…

Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items

BACKGROUND: The thentest design aims to detect and control for recalibration response shift. This design assumes (1) more consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying patients’ quality of life (QoL) between posttest and thentest assessments than between posttest and pretest asses...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F., Schwartz, Carolyn E., van Zuuren, Florence J., Koeneman, Margot A., Visser, Mechteld R. M., Tishelman, Carol, Koning, Caro C. E., Sprangers, Mirjam A. G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4870298/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26573019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1175-4
_version_ 1782432414197350400
author Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F.
Schwartz, Carolyn E.
van Zuuren, Florence J.
Koeneman, Margot A.
Visser, Mechteld R. M.
Tishelman, Carol
Koning, Caro C. E.
Sprangers, Mirjam A. G.
author_facet Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F.
Schwartz, Carolyn E.
van Zuuren, Florence J.
Koeneman, Margot A.
Visser, Mechteld R. M.
Tishelman, Carol
Koning, Caro C. E.
Sprangers, Mirjam A. G.
author_sort Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The thentest design aims to detect and control for recalibration response shift. This design assumes (1) more consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying patients’ quality of life (QoL) between posttest and thentest assessments than between posttest and pretest assessments; and (2) consistency in the time frame and description of functioning referenced at pretest and thentest. Our objective is to utilize cognitive interviewing to qualitatively examine both assumptions. METHODS: We conducted think-aloud interviews with 24 patients with cancer prior to and after radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying their assessment of seven EORTC QLQ-C30 items at pretest, posttest and thentest. We used an analytic scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin and Schwartz that yielded five cognitive processes. We subsequently used this input for quantitative analysis of count data. RESULTS: Contrary to expectation, the number of dissimilar cognitive processes between posttest and thentest was generally larger than between pretest and posttest across patients. Further, patients considered a range of time frames when answering the thentest questions. Moreover, patients’ description at the thentest of their pretest functioning was often not similar to that which was noted at pretest. Items referring to trouble taking a short walk, overall health and QoL were most often violating the assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Both assumptions underlying the thentest design appear not to be supported by the patients’ cognitive processes. Replacing the conventional pretest–posttest design with the thentest design may simply be replacing one set of biases with another. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-015-1175-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4870298
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48702982016-06-21 Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F. Schwartz, Carolyn E. van Zuuren, Florence J. Koeneman, Margot A. Visser, Mechteld R. M. Tishelman, Carol Koning, Caro C. E. Sprangers, Mirjam A. G. Qual Life Res Special Section: Response Shift Effects at Item Level (by invitation only) BACKGROUND: The thentest design aims to detect and control for recalibration response shift. This design assumes (1) more consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying patients’ quality of life (QoL) between posttest and thentest assessments than between posttest and pretest assessments; and (2) consistency in the time frame and description of functioning referenced at pretest and thentest. Our objective is to utilize cognitive interviewing to qualitatively examine both assumptions. METHODS: We conducted think-aloud interviews with 24 patients with cancer prior to and after radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying their assessment of seven EORTC QLQ-C30 items at pretest, posttest and thentest. We used an analytic scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin and Schwartz that yielded five cognitive processes. We subsequently used this input for quantitative analysis of count data. RESULTS: Contrary to expectation, the number of dissimilar cognitive processes between posttest and thentest was generally larger than between pretest and posttest across patients. Further, patients considered a range of time frames when answering the thentest questions. Moreover, patients’ description at the thentest of their pretest functioning was often not similar to that which was noted at pretest. Items referring to trouble taking a short walk, overall health and QoL were most often violating the assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Both assumptions underlying the thentest design appear not to be supported by the patients’ cognitive processes. Replacing the conventional pretest–posttest design with the thentest design may simply be replacing one set of biases with another. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-015-1175-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2015-11-16 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4870298/ /pubmed/26573019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1175-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Special Section: Response Shift Effects at Item Level (by invitation only)
Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F.
Schwartz, Carolyn E.
van Zuuren, Florence J.
Koeneman, Margot A.
Visser, Mechteld R. M.
Tishelman, Carol
Koning, Caro C. E.
Sprangers, Mirjam A. G.
Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
title Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
title_full Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
title_fullStr Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
title_full_unstemmed Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
title_short Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
title_sort using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items
topic Special Section: Response Shift Effects at Item Level (by invitation only)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4870298/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26573019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1175-4
work_keys_str_mv AT taminiaubloemelsbethf usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT schwartzcarolyne usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT vanzuurenflorencej usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT koenemanmargota usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT vissermechteldrm usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT tishelmancarol usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT koningcaroce usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems
AT sprangersmirjamag usingaretrospectivepretestinsteadofaconventionalpretestisreplacingbiasesaqualitativestudyofcognitiveprocessesunderlyingresponsestothentestitems