Tolulope T Sajobi1, Ronak Brahmbatt2, Lisa M Lix3, Bruno D Zumbo4, Richard Sawatzky2,5. 1. Department of Community Health Sciences & O'Brien Institute for Public Health, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4Z6, Canada. tolu.sajobi@ucalgary.ca. 2. School of Nursing, Trinity Western University, Langley, Canada. 3. Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. 4. Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, and Special Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. 5. Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Response shift (RS) has been defined as a change in the meaning of an individual's self-evaluation of his/her health status and quality of life. Several statistical model- and design-based methods have been developed to test for RS in longitudinal data. We reviewed the uptake of these methods in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) literature. METHODS: CINHAHL, EMBASE, Medline, ProQuest, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched to identify English-language articles about RS published until 2016. Data on year and country of publication, PRO measure adopted, RS detection method, type of RS detected, and testing of underlying model assumptions were extracted from the included articles. RESULTS: Of the 1032 articles identified, 101 (9.8%) articles were included in the study. While 54.5 of the articles reported on the Then-test, 30.7% of the articles reported on Oort's or Schmitt's structural equation modeling (SEM) procedure. Newer RS detection methods, such as relative importance analysis and random forest regression, have been used less frequently. Less than 25% reported on testing the assumptions underlying the adopted RS detection method(s). CONCLUSIONS: Despite rapid methodological advancements in RS research, this review highlights the need for further research about RS detection methods for complex longitudinal data and standardized reporting guidelines.
BACKGROUND: Response shift (RS) has been defined as a change in the meaning of an individual's self-evaluation of his/her health status and quality of life. Several statistical model- and design-based methods have been developed to test for RS in longitudinal data. We reviewed the uptake of these methods in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) literature. METHODS: CINHAHL, EMBASE, Medline, ProQuest, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched to identify English-language articles about RS published until 2016. Data on year and country of publication, PRO measure adopted, RS detection method, type of RS detected, and testing of underlying model assumptions were extracted from the included articles. RESULTS: Of the 1032 articles identified, 101 (9.8%) articles were included in the study. While 54.5 of the articles reported on the Then-test, 30.7% of the articles reported on Oort's or Schmitt's structural equation modeling (SEM) procedure. Newer RS detection methods, such as relative importance analysis and random forest regression, have been used less frequently. Less than 25% reported on testing the assumptions underlying the adopted RS detection method(s). CONCLUSIONS: Despite rapid methodological advancements in RS research, this review highlights the need for further research about RS detection methods for complex longitudinal data and standardized reporting guidelines.
Authors: Carolyn E Schwartz; Rita Bode; Nicholas Repucci; Janine Becker; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Peter M Fayers Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-09-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Tolulope T Sajobi; Lisa M Lix; Gurbakhshash Singh; Mark Lowerison; Jordan Engbers; Nancy E Mayo Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-10-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: B Balain; O Ennis; G Kanes; R Singhal; S N J Roberts; Dai Rees; J H Kuiper Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2009-02-28 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Sara Ahmed; Richard Sawatzky; Jean-Frédéric Levesque; Deborah Ehrmann-Feldman; Carolyn E Schwartz Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Lisa M Lix; Eric K H Chan; Richard Sawatzky; Tolulope T Sajobi; Juxin Liu; Wilma Hopman; Nancy Mayo Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-11-20 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Alison E Turnbull; Hongkai Ji; Victor D Dinglas; Albert W Wu; Pedro A Mendez-Tellez; Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb; Carl B Shanholtz; Megan M Hosey; Ramona O Hopkins; Dale M Needham Journal: Chest Date: 2021-08-19 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Fabiola Müller; Mathilde G E Verdam; Frans J Oort; Heleen Riper; Annemieke van Straten; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Hans Knoop Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2022-07-22
Authors: Laura L Tosi; Marianne K Floor; Christina M Dollar; Austin P Gillies; Tracy S Hart; David D Cuthbertson; V Reid Sutton; Jeffrey P Krischer Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis Date: 2019-01-29 Impact factor: 4.123
Authors: Iris D Hartog; Dick L Willems; Wilbert B van den Hout; Michael Scherer-Rath; Tom H Oreel; José P S Henriques; Pythia T Nieuwkerk; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Mirjam A G Sprangers Journal: BMC Med Ethics Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 2.652
Authors: Tino Prell; Nayana Gaur; Robert Steinbach; Otto W Witte; Julian Grosskreutz Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Hao Chen; Lin Zhu; Rui Zhou; Panpan Liu; Xiaoyang Lu; Donald L Patrick; Todd C Edwards; Hongmei Wang Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2021-03-17 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: M G E Verdam; W van Ballegooijen; C J M Holtmaat; H Knoop; J Lancee; F J Oort; H Riper; A van Straten; I M Verdonck-de Leeuw; M de Wit; T van der Zweerde; M A G Sprangers Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-05-25 Impact factor: 3.240