Literature DB >> 28085146

One size doesn't fit all: time to revisit patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in paediatric ophthalmology?

V Tadić1,2, J S Rahi1,2,3,4.   

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to summarise methodological challenges and opportunities in the development and application of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for the rare and complex population of children with visually impairing disorders. Following a literature review on development and application of PROMs in children in general, including those with disabilities and or/chronic condition, we identified and discuss here 5 key issues that are specific to children with visual impairment: (1) the conflation between theoretically distinct vision-related constructs and outcomes, (2) the importance of developmentally appropriate approaches to design and application of PROMs, (3) feasibility of standard questionnaire formats and administration for children with different levels of visual impairment, (4) feasibility and nature of self-reporting by visually impaired children, and (5) epidemiological, statistical and ethical considerations. There is an established need for vision-specific age-appropriate PROMs for use in paediatric ophthalmology, but there are significant practical and methodological challenges in developing and applying appropriate measures. Further understanding of the characteristics and needs of visually impaired children as questionnaire respondents is necessary for development of quality PROMs and their meaningful application in clinical practice and research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28085146      PMCID: PMC5396010          DOI: 10.1038/eye.2016.316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  32 in total

1.  Relationship between patient reported experience (PREMs) and patient reported outcomes (PROMs) in elective surgery.

Authors:  Nick Black; Mira Varaganum; Andrew Hutchings
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 7.035

2.  The disability paradox: high quality of life against all odds.

Authors:  G L Albrecht; P J Devlieger
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study.

Authors:  Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  'Silent voices' in health services research: ethnicity and socioeconomic variation in participation in studies of quality of life in childhood visual disability.

Authors:  Valerie Tadic; Esther Louise Hamblion; Sarah Keeley; Phillippa Cumberland; Gillian Lewando Hundt; Jugnoo Sangeeta Rahi
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare.

Authors:  Nick Black
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-28

6.  Development of an instrument to assess vision-related quality of life in young children.

Authors:  Joost Felius; David R Stager; Priscilla M Berry; Sherry L Fawcett; David R Stager; Solange R Salomão; Adriana Berezovsky; Eileen E Birch
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.258

Review 7.  Epidemiology, aetiology and management of visual impairment in children.

Authors:  Ameenat Lola Solebo; Jugnoo Rahi
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 8.  Assessment of functional vision and its rehabilitation.

Authors:  August Colenbrander
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.761

9.  The health-related quality of life of children with hereditary retinal disorders and the psychosocial impact on their families.

Authors:  Esther Louise Hamblion; Anthony Thomas Moore; Jugnoo Sangeeta Rahi
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  Protocol of the COSMIN study: COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments.

Authors:  L B Mokkink; C B Terwee; D L Knol; P W Stratford; J Alonso; D L Patrick; L M Bouter; H C W de Vet
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-01-24       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  8 in total

1.  The Patient Concerns Inventory integrated as part of routine head and neck cancer follow-up consultations: frequency, case-mix, and items initiated by the patient.

Authors:  S N Rogers; F Thomson; D Lowe
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Framework To Guide The Collection And Use Of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures In The Learning Healthcare System.

Authors:  Patricia Franklin; Kate Chenok; Danielle Lavalee; Rebecca Love; Liz Paxton; Courtney Segal; Erin Holve
Journal:  EGEMS (Wash DC)       Date:  2017-09-04

3.  Using home sensing technology to assess outcome and recovery after hip and knee replacement in the UK: the HEmiSPHERE study protocol.

Authors:  Sabrina Grant; A W Blom; Michael R Whitehouse; Ian Craddock; Andrew Judge; Emma L Tonkin; Rachael Gooberman-Hill
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-07-28       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 4.  Measuring what matters to rare disease patients - reflections on the work by the IRDiRC taskforce on patient-centered outcome measures.

Authors:  Thomas Morel; Stefan J Cano
Journal:  Orphanet J Rare Dis       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 4.123

5.  Attitudes, experiences, and preferences of ophthalmic professionals regarding routine use of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice.

Authors:  Alexandra O Robertson; Valerija Tadić; Jugnoo S Rahi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Outcome measures in juvenile X-linked retinoschisis: A systematic review.

Authors:  John R Grigg; Claire Y Hooper; Clare L Fraser; Elisa E Cornish; Peter J McCluskey; Robyn V Jamieson
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 3.775

7.  Psychometric evaluation of the Participation and Activity Inventory for Children and Youth (PAI-CY) 0-2 years with visual impairment.

Authors:  Ellen B M Elsman; Ruth M A van Nispen; Gerardus H M B van Rens
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Assessment of a patient-reported outcome measure in men with prostate cancer who had radical surgery: a Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Eva Protopapa; Jan van der Meulen; Caroline M Moore; Sarah C Smith
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-11-14       Impact factor: 2.692

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.