OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform psychometric testing of the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Child Impact Measure (GHD-CIM): a patient-reported outcome (PRO) for children with GHD aged 9 to < 13 years and an observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) for parents/guardians of children who are unable to answer for themselves. METHODS: A non-interventional, multicenter, clinic-based study was conducted in 30 private-practice and large institutional sites in the US and the UK. Psychometric analyses were conducted following an a priori validation statistical analysis plan. RESULTS: A preliminary examination of the data determined a PRO version for children aged 9 to < 13 years was not psychometrically sound and therefore the decision was made to have only an ObsRO measure of the GHD-CIM, which would be suitable for children aged 4 to < 13 years. The GHD-CIM ObsRO validity analyses included 98 parents/guardians. Factor analyses identified three domains: Physical Functioning (PHYS), Social Well-Being (SWB), and Emotional Well-Being (EWB). Internal consistency reliability was acceptable for all domains and for the overall score (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70), as was test-retest reliability for the SWB, EWB and overall (above 0.70). At least one convergent validity hypotheses for each domain and overall was proven (r > 0.40). Known-groups validity hypotheses for the EWB and SWB domains were significant (p < 0.05). Associated effect sizes ranged from - 0.40 to - 0.58, indicating that the GHD-CIM is sensitive to change. Anchor-based patient and clinician ratings of severity of disease suggest a preliminary minimally important difference of 5 points for the overall score, and 5 for PHYS, 7 for EWB, and 5 for SWB. CONCLUSIONS: The GHD-CIM ObsRO was found to be a reliable and valid measure to assess disease-specific functioning, which will provide a more complete patient-centric picture to the growth hormone therapy experience in children. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02580032, first posted 20 October 2015.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform psychometric testing of the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Child Impact Measure (GHD-CIM): a patient-reported outcome (PRO) for children with GHD aged 9 to < 13 years and an observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) for parents/guardians of children who are unable to answer for themselves. METHODS: A non-interventional, multicenter, clinic-based study was conducted in 30 private-practice and large institutional sites in the US and the UK. Psychometric analyses were conducted following an a priori validation statistical analysis plan. RESULTS: A preliminary examination of the data determined a PRO version for children aged 9 to < 13 years was not psychometrically sound and therefore the decision was made to have only an ObsRO measure of the GHD-CIM, which would be suitable for children aged 4 to < 13 years. The GHD-CIM ObsRO validity analyses included 98 parents/guardians. Factor analyses identified three domains: Physical Functioning (PHYS), Social Well-Being (SWB), and Emotional Well-Being (EWB). Internal consistency reliability was acceptable for all domains and for the overall score (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70), as was test-retest reliability for the SWB, EWB and overall (above 0.70). At least one convergent validity hypotheses for each domain and overall was proven (r > 0.40). Known-groups validity hypotheses for the EWB and SWB domains were significant (p < 0.05). Associated effect sizes ranged from - 0.40 to - 0.58, indicating that the GHD-CIM is sensitive to change. Anchor-based patient and clinician ratings of severity of disease suggest a preliminary minimally important difference of 5 points for the overall score, and 5 for PHYS, 7 for EWB, and 5 for SWB. CONCLUSIONS: The GHD-CIM ObsRO was found to be a reliable and valid measure to assess disease-specific functioning, which will provide a more complete patient-centric picture to the growth hormone therapy experience in children. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02580032, first posted 20 October 2015.
Authors: Adda Grimberg; Sara A DiVall; Constantin Polychronakos; David B Allen; Laurie E Cohen; Jose Bernardo Quintos; Wilma C Rossi; Chris Feudtner; Mohammad Hassan Murad Journal: Horm Res Paediatr Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: Louis S Matza; Donald L Patrick; Anne W Riley; John J Alexander; Luis Rajmil; Andreas M Pleil; Monika Bullinger Journal: Value Health Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: M Thomas; G Massa; M Craen; F de Zegher; J P Bourguignon; C Heinrichs; J De Schepper; M Du Caju; G Thiry-Counson; M Maes Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Meryl Brod; Suzanne Lessard Alolga; Jane F Beck; Lars Wilkinson; Lise Højbjerre; Michael Højby Rasmussen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-02-28 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Monika Bullinger; Julia Quitmann; Mick Power; Michael Herdman; Emmanuelle Mimoun; Kendra DeBusk; Eva Feigerlova; Carolina Lunde; Maria Dellenmark-Blom; Dolores Sanz; Anja Rohenkohl; Andreas Pleil; Hartmut Wollmann; John E Chaplin Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Meryl Brod; Michael Højby Rasmussen; Suzanne Alolga; Jane F Beck; Donald M Bushnell; Kai Wai Lee; Aristides Maniatis Journal: Pharmacoecon Open Date: 2022-10-18