Cargando…

Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review

BACKGROUND: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) measure patients’ perspectives on health outcomes and are increasingly used in health care. To capture the patient's perspective, it is essential that patients are involved in PROM development OBJECTIVE: This article reviews in what ways and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wiering, Bianca, de Boer, Dolf, Delnoij, Diana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26889874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12442
_version_ 1782492178199609344
author Wiering, Bianca
de Boer, Dolf
Delnoij, Diana
author_facet Wiering, Bianca
de Boer, Dolf
Delnoij, Diana
author_sort Wiering, Bianca
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) measure patients’ perspectives on health outcomes and are increasingly used in health care. To capture the patient's perspective, it is essential that patients are involved in PROM development OBJECTIVE: This article reviews in what ways and to what extent patients are involved in PROM development and whether patient involvement has increased over time. SEARCH STRATEGY: Literature was searched in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies were included if they described a new PROM development. DATA EXTRACTION: Basic information and information regarding patient involvement in development phases was recorded. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 189 studies, describing the development of 193 PROMs, were included. Most PROMs were meant for chronic disease patients (n = 59) and measured quality of life (n = 28). In 25.9% of the PROM development studies, no patients were involved. Patients were mostly involved during item development (58.5%), closely followed by testing for comprehensibility (50.8%), while patient involvement in determining which outcome to measure was minimal (10.9%). Some patient involvement took place in the development of most PROMs, but in only 6.7% patients were involved in all aspects of the development. Patient involvement did not increase with time. CONCLUSIONS: Although patient involvement in PROM development is essential to develop valid patient‐centred PROMs, patients are not always involved. When patients are involved, their level of involvement varies considerably. These variations suggest that further attention to building and/or disseminating consensus on requirements for patient involvement in PROM development is necessary.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5217930
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52179302017-02-01 Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review Wiering, Bianca de Boer, Dolf Delnoij, Diana Health Expect Review Article BACKGROUND: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) measure patients’ perspectives on health outcomes and are increasingly used in health care. To capture the patient's perspective, it is essential that patients are involved in PROM development OBJECTIVE: This article reviews in what ways and to what extent patients are involved in PROM development and whether patient involvement has increased over time. SEARCH STRATEGY: Literature was searched in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies were included if they described a new PROM development. DATA EXTRACTION: Basic information and information regarding patient involvement in development phases was recorded. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 189 studies, describing the development of 193 PROMs, were included. Most PROMs were meant for chronic disease patients (n = 59) and measured quality of life (n = 28). In 25.9% of the PROM development studies, no patients were involved. Patients were mostly involved during item development (58.5%), closely followed by testing for comprehensibility (50.8%), while patient involvement in determining which outcome to measure was minimal (10.9%). Some patient involvement took place in the development of most PROMs, but in only 6.7% patients were involved in all aspects of the development. Patient involvement did not increase with time. CONCLUSIONS: Although patient involvement in PROM development is essential to develop valid patient‐centred PROMs, patients are not always involved. When patients are involved, their level of involvement varies considerably. These variations suggest that further attention to building and/or disseminating consensus on requirements for patient involvement in PROM development is necessary. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-02-18 2017-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5217930/ /pubmed/26889874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12442 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Wiering, Bianca
de Boer, Dolf
Delnoij, Diana
Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
title Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
title_full Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
title_fullStr Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
title_short Patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
title_sort patient involvement in the development of patient‐reported outcome measures: a scoping review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26889874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12442
work_keys_str_mv AT wieringbianca patientinvolvementinthedevelopmentofpatientreportedoutcomemeasuresascopingreview
AT deboerdolf patientinvolvementinthedevelopmentofpatientreportedoutcomemeasuresascopingreview
AT delnoijdiana patientinvolvementinthedevelopmentofpatientreportedoutcomemeasuresascopingreview