Literature DB >> 30985591

PRO-Bookmarking to Estimate Clinical Thresholds for Patient-reported Symptoms and Function.

Karon F Cook1, David Cella1, Bryce B Reeve2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: PRO-Bookmarking is an alternative to traditional methods for deriving cut scores and applying qualitative modifiers to score ranges.
METHODS: In PRO-Bookmarking, a working group of stakeholders identifies ranges of scores they judge to credibly define different levels of a patient-reported outcome (PRO). Subsets of items and responses, called "clinical vignettes," are woven into a narrative to represent different levels of the PRO. Working individually, stakeholders bookmark thresholds between clinical vignettes, ordered by PRO level, to define thresholds (eg, no problems, mild problems). Discussion of individual bookmark placements is led by a moderator with the goal of consensus with regard to bookmark locations. DISCUSSION: The value of PRO measures depends on the extent to which different stakeholders are able to interpret scores. The PRO-Bookmarking method provides credible evidence on the common-language meaning of different ranges of scores. This evidence supplements other interpretative methods such as normative comparisons and comparisons with an external standard. PRO-Bookmarking is particularly valuable when, as is often the case with PRO measures, there is no clear external standard or even a useful external reference with which to compare PRO scores. KEY POINTS: The PRO-Bookmarking procedure is a qualitative method that engages key stakeholders in in-depth consideration of the semantic meaning of ranges of PRO scores. Measures based on item banks calibrated using item response theory are ideal for PRO-Bookmarking. Response probabilities conditioned on different levels of the PRO are derived directly from the item response theory model, and item banks contain more items than traditional measures. Having a large number of items provides flexibility in the choice and variety of items that can be used to comprise the clinical vignettes. There is much to learn about Bookmarking in the PRO context and, more generally, about all methods for establishing PRO score thresholds. Issues for further study include the role of context of use for classifications, selection of semantic labels for levels of a PRO, and the extent to which findings generalize to clinical utility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30985591     DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  9 in total

1.  Establishing clinically-relevant terms and severity thresholds for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures of physical function, cognitive function, and sleep disturbance in people with cancer using standard setting.

Authors:  Nan E Rothrock; Karon F Cook; Mary O'Connor; David Cella; Ashley Wilder Smith; Susan E Yount
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 2.  Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Pediatric Rheumatic Diseases: Considerations and Future Directions.

Authors:  Christina K Zigler; Rachel L Randell; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Rheum Dis Clin North Am       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 2.032

3.  Interpreting Life Impact Burn Recovery Evaluation Profile Scores for Use by Clinicians, Burn Survivors, and Researchers.

Authors:  Mary D Slavin; Colleen M Ryan; Jeffrey C Schneider; Amy Acton; Flor Amaya; Cayla Saret; Emily Ohrtman; Audrey Wolfe; Pengsheng Ni; Lewis E Kazis
Journal:  J Burn Care Res       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 1.845

4.  A New Procedure to Assess When Estimates from the Cumulative Link Model Can Be Interpreted as Differences for Ordinal Scales in Quality of Life Studies.

Authors:  Yilin Ning; Peh Joo Ho; Nathalie C Støer; Ka Keat Lim; Hwee-Lin Wee; Mikael Hartman; Marie Reilly; Chuen Seng Tan
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.790

5.  Considerations to Support Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pediatric Measures in Ambulatory Clinics.

Authors:  Elizabeth D Cox; Sarah K Dobrozsi; Christopher B Forrest; Wendy E Gerhardt; Harald Kliems; Bryce B Reeve; Nan E Rothrock; Jin-Shei Lai; Jacob M Svenson; Lindsay A Thompson; Thuy Dan N Tran; Carole A Tucker
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 4.406

6.  Clinical Use of PROMIS, Neuro-QoL, TBI-QoL, and Other Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Individual Adult Clients with Cognitive and Language Disorders.

Authors:  Matthew L Cohen; Alyssa M Lanzi; Aaron J Boulton
Journal:  Semin Speech Lang       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 1.734

7.  Association of Inventory to Measure and Assess imaGe Disturbance - Head and Neck Scores With Clinically Meaningful Body Image-Related Distress Among Head and Neck Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  David Macias; Brittany N Hand; Patrik Pipkorn; Amy M Williams; Steven S Chang; Joseph Zenga; Marci L Nilsen; Bethany A Rhoten; Andrew T Huang; Nosayaba Osazuwa-Peters; Stacey Maurer; Wendy Balliet; Hong Li; Kenneth J Ruggiero; Katherine R Sterba; Evan M Graboyes
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-12-10

Review 8.  Minimal important change (MIC): a conceptual clarification and systematic review of MIC estimates of PROMIS measures.

Authors:  Caroline B Terwee; John Devin Peipert; Robert Chapman; Jin-Shei Lai; Berend Terluin; David Cella; Philip Griffith; Lidwine B Mokkink
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Giving meaning to the scores of the Amsterdam instrumental activities of daily living questionnaire: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Mark A Dubbelman; Caroline B Terwee; Merike Verrijp; Leonie N C Visser; Philip Scheltens; Sietske A M Sikkes
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 3.186

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.