Conrad J Harrison1, Daan Geerards2, Maarten J Ottenhof2, Anne F Klassen3, Karen W Y Wong Riff4, Marc C Swan5, Andrea L Pusic6, Chris J Sidey-Gibbons7. 1. Department of Plastic Surgery, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK; Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value & Experience (PROVE) Centre, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: conrad.harrison@medsci.ox.ac.uk. 2. Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value & Experience (PROVE) Centre, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. 4. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Department of Plastic Surgery, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK; Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 6. Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value & Experience (PROVE) Centre, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 7. Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value & Experience (PROVE) Centre, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: cgibbons2@bwh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The International Consortium for Health Outcome Measurement (ICHOM) has recently agreed upon a core outcome set for the comprehensive appraisal of cleft care, which puts a greater emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and, in particular, the CLEFT-Q. The CLEFT-Q comprises 12 scales with a total of 110 items, aimed to be answered by children as young as 8 years old. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to use computerised adaptive testing (CAT) to reduce the number of items needed to predict results for each CLEFT-Q scale. METHOD: We used an open-source CAT simulation package to run item responses over each of the full-length scales and its CAT counterpart at varying degrees of precision, estimated by standard error (SE). The mean number of items needed to achieve a given SE was recorded for each scale's CAT, and the correlations between results from the full-length scales and those predicted by the CAT versions were calculated. RESULTS: Using CATs for each of the 12 CLEFT-Q scales, we reduced the number of questions that participants needed to answer, that is, from 110 to a mean of 43.1 (range 34-60, SE < 0.55) while maintaining a 97% correlation between scores obtained with CAT and full-length scales. CONCLUSIONS: CAT is likely to play a fundamental role in the uptake of PROMs into clinical practice given the high degree of accuracy achievable with substantially fewer items.
BACKGROUND: The International Consortium for Health Outcome Measurement (ICHOM) has recently agreed upon a core outcome set for the comprehensive appraisal of cleft care, which puts a greater emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and, in particular, the CLEFT-Q. The CLEFT-Q comprises 12 scales with a total of 110 items, aimed to be answered by children as young as 8 years old. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to use computerised adaptive testing (CAT) to reduce the number of items needed to predict results for each CLEFT-Q scale. METHOD: We used an open-source CAT simulation package to run item responses over each of the full-length scales and its CAT counterpart at varying degrees of precision, estimated by standard error (SE). The mean number of items needed to achieve a given SE was recorded for each scale's CAT, and the correlations between results from the full-length scales and those predicted by the CAT versions were calculated. RESULTS: Using CATs for each of the 12 CLEFT-Q scales, we reduced the number of questions that participants needed to answer, that is, from 110 to a mean of 43.1 (range 34-60, SE < 0.55) while maintaining a 97% correlation between scores obtained with CAT and full-length scales. CONCLUSIONS: CAT is likely to play a fundamental role in the uptake of PROMs into clinical practice given the high degree of accuracy achievable with substantially fewer items.
Authors: Maarten J Ottenhof; Inge J Veldhuizen; Lusanne J V Hensbergen; Louise L Blankensteijn; Wichor Bramer; Berend Vd Lei; Maarten M Hoogbergen; René R W J Hulst; Chris J Sidey-Gibbons Journal: Aesthetic Plast Surg Date: 2022-06-28 Impact factor: 2.326
Authors: Sarah E Hughes; Shamil Haroon; Anuradhaa Subramanian; Christel McMullan; Olalekan L Aiyegbusi; Grace M Turner; Louise Jackson; Elin Haf Davies; Chris Frost; Gary McNamara; Gary Price; Karen Matthews; Jennifer Camaradou; Jane Ormerod; Anita Walker; Melanie J Calvert Journal: BMJ Date: 2022-04-27
Authors: Conrad J Harrison; Chris J Sidey-Gibbons; Anne F Klassen; Karen W Y Wong Riff; Dominic Furniss; Marc C Swan; Jeremy N Rodrigues Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2021-09-17
Authors: Tim Pickles; Rhiannon Macefield; Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi; Claire Beecher; Mike Horton; Karl Bang Christensen; Rhiannon Phillips; David Gillespie; Ernest Choy Journal: RMD Open Date: 2022-03
Authors: Rakhshan Kamran; Jeremy N Rodrigues; Thomas D Dobbs; Justin C R Wormald; Ryan W Trickett; Conrad J Harrison Journal: J Hand Surg Eur Vol Date: 2022-03-22