Patient versus clinician item generation for quality-of-life measures. The case of language-disabled adults.

Using nominal group process to develop a measure of quality of life, two groups of aphasic patients and a group of rehabilitation clinicians generated separate lists of important functional communication situations. Comparison of the lists by raters who were blind to their source revealed that the two patient lists were more similar to each other than were either of the patient lists to the clinician list; clinicians underestimate the patients' focus on social needs; patients, rather than clinicians, generated the more specific and concrete situations, which are of use in a quality-of-life measure. The study demonstrates that language-disabled adults can generate items for a quality-of-life measure (hence, this should be possible in almost any other disease group), and that clinician-generated items are not fully representative of patient values.