Cargando…
Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events
BACKGROUND: Traditional concordance metrics have shortcomings based on dataset characteristics (e.g., multiple attributes rated, missing data); therefore it is necessary to explore supplemental approaches to quantifying agreement between independent assessments. The purpose of this methodological pa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6279753/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30515599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0086-x |
_version_ | 1783378530477801472 |
---|---|
author | Atkinson, Thomas M. Reeve, Bryce B. Dueck, Amylou C. Bennett, Antonia V. Mendoza, Tito R. Rogak, Lauren J. Basch, Ethan Li, Yuelin |
author_facet | Atkinson, Thomas M. Reeve, Bryce B. Dueck, Amylou C. Bennett, Antonia V. Mendoza, Tito R. Rogak, Lauren J. Basch, Ethan Li, Yuelin |
author_sort | Atkinson, Thomas M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Traditional concordance metrics have shortcomings based on dataset characteristics (e.g., multiple attributes rated, missing data); therefore it is necessary to explore supplemental approaches to quantifying agreement between independent assessments. The purpose of this methodological paper is to apply an Item Response Theory (IRT) -based framework to an existing dataset that included unidimensional clinician and multiple attribute patient ratings of symptomatic adverse events (AEs), and explore the utility of this method in patient-reported outcome (PRO) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) research. METHODS: Data were derived from a National Cancer Institute-sponsored study examining the validity of a measurement system (PRO-CTCAE) for patient self-reporting of AEs in cancer patients receiving treatment (N = 940). AEs included 13 multiple attribute patient-reported symptoms that had corresponding unidimensional clinician AE grades. A Bayesian IRT Model was fitted to calculate the latent grading thresholds between raters. The posterior mean values of the model-fitted item responses were calculated to represent model-based AE grades obtained from patients and clinicians. RESULTS: Model-based AE grades showed a general pattern of clinician underestimation relative to patient-graded AEs. However, the magnitude of clinician underestimation was associated with AE severity, such that clinicians’ underestimation was more pronounced for moderate/very severe model-estimated AEs, and less so with mild AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The Bayesian IRT approach reconciles multiple symptom attributes and elaborates on the patterns of clinician-patient non-concordance beyond that provided by traditional metrics. This IRT-based technique may be used as a supplemental tool to detect and characterize nuanced differences in patient-, clinician-, and proxy-based ratings of HRQOL and patient-centered outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01031641. Registered 1 December 2009. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6279753 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62797532018-12-26 Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events Atkinson, Thomas M. Reeve, Bryce B. Dueck, Amylou C. Bennett, Antonia V. Mendoza, Tito R. Rogak, Lauren J. Basch, Ethan Li, Yuelin J Patient Rep Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: Traditional concordance metrics have shortcomings based on dataset characteristics (e.g., multiple attributes rated, missing data); therefore it is necessary to explore supplemental approaches to quantifying agreement between independent assessments. The purpose of this methodological paper is to apply an Item Response Theory (IRT) -based framework to an existing dataset that included unidimensional clinician and multiple attribute patient ratings of symptomatic adverse events (AEs), and explore the utility of this method in patient-reported outcome (PRO) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) research. METHODS: Data were derived from a National Cancer Institute-sponsored study examining the validity of a measurement system (PRO-CTCAE) for patient self-reporting of AEs in cancer patients receiving treatment (N = 940). AEs included 13 multiple attribute patient-reported symptoms that had corresponding unidimensional clinician AE grades. A Bayesian IRT Model was fitted to calculate the latent grading thresholds between raters. The posterior mean values of the model-fitted item responses were calculated to represent model-based AE grades obtained from patients and clinicians. RESULTS: Model-based AE grades showed a general pattern of clinician underestimation relative to patient-graded AEs. However, the magnitude of clinician underestimation was associated with AE severity, such that clinicians’ underestimation was more pronounced for moderate/very severe model-estimated AEs, and less so with mild AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The Bayesian IRT approach reconciles multiple symptom attributes and elaborates on the patterns of clinician-patient non-concordance beyond that provided by traditional metrics. This IRT-based technique may be used as a supplemental tool to detect and characterize nuanced differences in patient-, clinician-, and proxy-based ratings of HRQOL and patient-centered outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01031641. Registered 1 December 2009. Springer International Publishing 2018-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6279753/ /pubmed/30515599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0086-x Text en © The Author(s) 2018 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 | Research Atkinson, Thomas M. Reeve, Bryce B. Dueck, Amylou C. Bennett, Antonia V. Mendoza, Tito R. Rogak, Lauren J. Basch, Ethan Li, Yuelin Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
title | Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
title_full | Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
title_fullStr | Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
title_full_unstemmed | Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
title_short | Application of a Bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
title_sort | application of a bayesian graded response model to characterize areas of disagreement between clinician and patient grading of symptomatic adverse events |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6279753/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30515599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0086-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT atkinsonthomasm applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT reevebryceb applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT dueckamylouc applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT bennettantoniav applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT mendozatitor applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT rogaklaurenj applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT baschethan applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents AT liyuelin applicationofabayesiangradedresponsemodeltocharacterizeareasofdisagreementbetweenclinicianandpatientgradingofsymptomaticadverseevents |