OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcome measures with reporting periods of a week or more are often used to evaluate the change of symptoms over time, but the accuracy of recall in the context of change is not well understood. This study examined whether temporal trends in symptoms that occur during the reporting period impact the accuracy of 7-day recall reports. METHODS: Women with premenstrual symptoms (n=95) completed daily reports of anger, depression, fatigue, and pain intensity for 4weeks, as well as 7-day recall reports at the end of each week. Latent class growth analysis was used to categorize recall periods based on the direction and rate of change in the daily reports. Agreement (level differences and correlations) between 7-day recall and aggregated daily scores was compared for recall periods with different temporal trends. RESULTS: Recall periods with positive, negative, and flat temporal trends were identified and they varied in accordance with weeks of the menstrual cycle. Replicating previous research, 7-day recall scores were consistently higher than aggregated daily scores, but this level difference was more pronounced for recall periods involving positive and negative trends compared with flat trends. Moreover, correlations between 7-day recall and aggregated daily scores were lower in the presence of positive and negative trends compared with flat trends. These findings were largely consistent for anger, depression, fatigue, and pain intensity. CONCLUSION: Temporal trends in symptoms can influence the accuracy of recall reports and this should be considered in research designs involving change.
OBJECTIVE:Patient-reported outcome measures with reporting periods of a week or more are often used to evaluate the change of symptoms over time, but the accuracy of recall in the context of change is not well understood. This study examined whether temporal trends in symptoms that occur during the reporting period impact the accuracy of 7-day recall reports. METHODS:Women with premenstrual symptoms (n=95) completed daily reports of anger, depression, fatigue, and pain intensity for 4weeks, as well as 7-day recall reports at the end of each week. Latent class growth analysis was used to categorize recall periods based on the direction and rate of change in the daily reports. Agreement (level differences and correlations) between 7-day recall and aggregated daily scores was compared for recall periods with different temporal trends. RESULTS:Recall periods with positive, negative, and flat temporal trends were identified and they varied in accordance with weeks of the menstrual cycle. Replicating previous research, 7-day recall scores were consistently higher than aggregated daily scores, but this level difference was more pronounced for recall periods involving positive and negative trends compared with flat trends. Moreover, correlations between 7-day recall and aggregated daily scores were lower in the presence of positive and negative trends compared with flat trends. These findings were largely consistent for anger, depression, fatigue, and pain intensity. CONCLUSION: Temporal trends in symptoms can influence the accuracy of recall reports and this should be considered in research designs involving change.
Authors: H Kikuchi; K Yoshiuchi; N Miyasaka; K Ohashi; Y Yamamoto; H Kumano; T Kuboki; A Akabayashi Journal: Cephalalgia Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 6.292
Authors: Doerte U Junghaenel; Stefan Schneider; Arthur A Stone; Christopher Christodoulou; Joan E Broderick Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2014-02-07 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Kathryn E Flynn; Sarah A Mansfield; Abigail R Smith; Brenda W Gillespie; Catherine S Bradley; David Cella; Margaret E Helmuth; H Henry Lai; Ziya Kirkali; Pooja Talaty; James W Griffith; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2020-07-23 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Ethan Basch; Amylou C Dueck; Lauren J Rogak; Lori M Minasian; William Kevin Kelly; Ann M O'Mara; Andrea M Denicoff; Drew Seisler; Pamela J Atherton; Electra Paskett; Lisa Carey; Maura Dickler; Rebecca S Heist; Andrew Himelstein; Hope S Rugo; William M Sikov; Mark A Socinski; Alan P Venook; Douglas J Weckstein; Diana E Lake; David D Biggs; Rachel A Freedman; Charles Kuzma; Jeffrey J Kirshner; Deborah Schrag Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Louis S Matza; Lindsey T Murray; Glenn A Phillips; Thomas J Konechnik; Ellen B Dennehy; Elizabeth N Bush; Dennis A Revicki Journal: Patient Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: Stephen Breazeale; Susan G Dorsey; Joan Kearney; Samantha Conley; Sangchoon Jeon; Brad Yoo; Nancy S Redeker Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2020-12-25 Impact factor: 2.228