Cargando…

Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires

BACKGROUND: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely recognized as important tools for achieving a patient‐centred approach in health research. While PROMs are subject to several stages of validation during development, even questionnaires with robust psychometric properties may challeng...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hudon, Catherine, Danish, Alya, Lambert, Mireille, Howse, Dana, Cassidy, Monique, Dumont‐Samson, Olivier, Porter, Judy, Rubenstein, Donna, Sabourin, Véronique, Doucet, Shelley, Ramsden, Vivian R., Bisson, Mathieu, Schwarz, Charlotte, Chouinard, Maud‐Christine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9615088/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34668630
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.13373
_version_ 1784820342290644992
author Hudon, Catherine
Danish, Alya
Lambert, Mireille
Howse, Dana
Cassidy, Monique
Dumont‐Samson, Olivier
Porter, Judy
Rubenstein, Donna
Sabourin, Véronique
Doucet, Shelley
Ramsden, Vivian R.
Bisson, Mathieu
Schwarz, Charlotte
Chouinard, Maud‐Christine
author_facet Hudon, Catherine
Danish, Alya
Lambert, Mireille
Howse, Dana
Cassidy, Monique
Dumont‐Samson, Olivier
Porter, Judy
Rubenstein, Donna
Sabourin, Véronique
Doucet, Shelley
Ramsden, Vivian R.
Bisson, Mathieu
Schwarz, Charlotte
Chouinard, Maud‐Christine
author_sort Hudon, Catherine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely recognized as important tools for achieving a patient‐centred approach in health research. While PROMs are subject to several stages of validation during development, even questionnaires with robust psychometric properties may challenge patient comfort and understanding. AIM: Building on the experience of patient engagement in the PriCARE research programme, this paper outlines the team's response to concerns raised by patient partners regarding the administration of the questionnaire. METHODS: Based on a participatory action research design and the patient engagement framework in the Strategy for Patient‐Oriented Research of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, PriCARE team members worked together to discuss concerns, review the questionnaires and come up with solutions. Data were collected through participant observation of team meetings. RESULTS: This paper demonstrates how patient partners were engaged in PriCARE and integrated into the programme's governance structure, focusing on the challenges that they raised regarding the questionnaires and how these were addressed by PriCARE team members in a six‐step approach: (1) Recognizing patient partner concerns, discussing concerns and reframing the challenges; (2) Detailing and sharing evidence of the validity of the questionnaires; (3) Evaluating potential solutions; (4) Searching the literature for guidelines; (5) Creating guidelines; and (6) Sharing and refining guidelines. CONCLUSION: This six‐step approach demonstrates how research teams can integrate patient partners as equal members, develop meaningful collaboration through recognition of individual experiences and expertise and ensure that the patient perspective is taken into consideration in research and healthcare innovation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: All patient partners from the PriCARE programme were actively involved in the six‐step approach. They were also involved in the preparation of the manuscript.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9615088
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96150882022-10-31 Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires Hudon, Catherine Danish, Alya Lambert, Mireille Howse, Dana Cassidy, Monique Dumont‐Samson, Olivier Porter, Judy Rubenstein, Donna Sabourin, Véronique Doucet, Shelley Ramsden, Vivian R. Bisson, Mathieu Schwarz, Charlotte Chouinard, Maud‐Christine Health Expect Vulnerable Populations Special Articles BACKGROUND: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely recognized as important tools for achieving a patient‐centred approach in health research. While PROMs are subject to several stages of validation during development, even questionnaires with robust psychometric properties may challenge patient comfort and understanding. AIM: Building on the experience of patient engagement in the PriCARE research programme, this paper outlines the team's response to concerns raised by patient partners regarding the administration of the questionnaire. METHODS: Based on a participatory action research design and the patient engagement framework in the Strategy for Patient‐Oriented Research of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, PriCARE team members worked together to discuss concerns, review the questionnaires and come up with solutions. Data were collected through participant observation of team meetings. RESULTS: This paper demonstrates how patient partners were engaged in PriCARE and integrated into the programme's governance structure, focusing on the challenges that they raised regarding the questionnaires and how these were addressed by PriCARE team members in a six‐step approach: (1) Recognizing patient partner concerns, discussing concerns and reframing the challenges; (2) Detailing and sharing evidence of the validity of the questionnaires; (3) Evaluating potential solutions; (4) Searching the literature for guidelines; (5) Creating guidelines; and (6) Sharing and refining guidelines. CONCLUSION: This six‐step approach demonstrates how research teams can integrate patient partners as equal members, develop meaningful collaboration through recognition of individual experiences and expertise and ensure that the patient perspective is taken into consideration in research and healthcare innovation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: All patient partners from the PriCARE programme were actively involved in the six‐step approach. They were also involved in the preparation of the manuscript. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-10-20 2022-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9615088/ /pubmed/34668630 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.13373 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Vulnerable Populations Special Articles
Hudon, Catherine
Danish, Alya
Lambert, Mireille
Howse, Dana
Cassidy, Monique
Dumont‐Samson, Olivier
Porter, Judy
Rubenstein, Donna
Sabourin, Véronique
Doucet, Shelley
Ramsden, Vivian R.
Bisson, Mathieu
Schwarz, Charlotte
Chouinard, Maud‐Christine
Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
title Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
title_full Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
title_fullStr Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
title_full_unstemmed Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
title_short Reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: Guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
title_sort reconciling validity and challenges of patient comfort and understanding: guidelines to patient‐oriented questionnaires
topic Vulnerable Populations Special Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9615088/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34668630
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.13373
work_keys_str_mv AT hudoncatherine reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT danishalya reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT lambertmireille reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT howsedana reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT cassidymonique reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT dumontsamsonolivier reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT porterjudy reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT rubensteindonna reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT sabourinveronique reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT doucetshelley reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT ramsdenvivianr reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT bissonmathieu reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT schwarzcharlotte reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires
AT chouinardmaudchristine reconcilingvalidityandchallengesofpatientcomfortandunderstandingguidelinestopatientorientedquestionnaires