Literature DB >> 34254262

The use of proxies and proxy-reported measures: a report of the international society for quality of life research (ISOQOL) proxy task force.

Jessica K Roydhouse1,2, Matthew L Cohen3, Henrik R Eshoj4, Nadia Corsini5, Emre Yucel6,7, Claudia Rutherford8,9, Katarzyna Wac10,11, Allan Berrocal10, Alyssa Lanzi3, Cindy Nowinski12, Natasha Roberts13,14, Angelos P Kassianos15, Veronique Sebille16,17, Madeleine T King9, Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber18,19.   

Abstract

AIMS: Proxy reports are often used when patients are unable to self-report. It is unclear how proxy measures are currently in use in adult health care and research settings. We aimed to describe how proxy reports are used in these settings, including the use of measures developed specifically for proxy reporting in adult health populations.
METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, PsycINFO, PsycTESTS, CINAHL and EMBASE from database inception to February 2018. Search terms included a combination of terms for quality of life and health outcomes, proxy-reporters, and health condition terms. The data extracted included clinical context, the name of the proxy measure(s) used and other descriptive data. We determined whether the measures were developed specifically for proxy use or were existing measures adapted for proxy use.
RESULTS: The database search identified 17,677 possible articles, from which 14,098 abstracts were reviewed. Of these, 11,763 were excluded and 2335 articles were reviewed in full, with 880 included for data extraction. The most common clinical settings were dementia (30%), geriatrics (15%) and cancer (13%). A majority of articles (51%) were paired studies with proxy and patient responses for the same person on the same measure. Most paired studies (77%) were concordance studies comparing patient and proxy responses on these measures. DISCUSSION: Most published research using proxies has focused on proxy-patient concordance. Relatively few measures used in research with proxies were specifically developed for proxy use. Future work is needed to examine the performance of measures specifically developed for proxies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO No. CRD42018103179.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Outcome measures; Proxy measures; Proxy-reported outcomes; Quality of life; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34254262     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-021-02937-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  33 in total

Review 1.  Proxy evaluation of health-related quality of life: a conceptual framework for understanding multiple proxy perspectives.

Authors:  A Simon Pickard; Sara J Knight
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Clinician-Reported Outcome Assessments of Treatment Benefit: Report of the ISPOR Clinical Outcome Assessment Emerging Good Practices Task Force.

Authors:  John H Powers; Donald L Patrick; Marc K Walton; Patrick Marquis; Stefan Cano; Jeremy Hobart; Maria Isaac; Spiros Vamvakas; Ashley Slagle; Elizabeth Molsen; Laurie B Burke
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Trials with proxy-reported outcomes registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

Authors:  Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Douglas Williams; Margaret-Ann Tait; Claudia Rutherford; Lucy Busija; Natasha Roberts; Michelle Wilson; Chindhu Shunmuga Sundaram; Jessica Roydhouse
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-12-15       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  Principles underlying the use of multiple informants' reports.

Authors:  Andres De Los Reyes; Sarah A Thomas; Kimberly L Goodman; Shannon M A Kundey
Journal:  Annu Rev Clin Psychol       Date:  2012-11-05       Impact factor: 18.561

5.  Pediatric patient-reported outcome instruments for research to support medical product labeling: report of the ISPOR PRO good research practices for the assessment of children and adolescents task force.

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

6.  Incidence and impact of proxy response in measuring patient experience: secondary analysis of a large postal survey using propensity score matching.

Authors:  Chris Graham
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.038

7.  Assessing agreement between terminally ill cancer patients' reports of their quality of life and family caregiver and palliative care physician proxy ratings.

Authors:  Jennifer M Jones; Christine J McPherson; Camilla Zimmermann; Gary Rodin; Lisa W Le; S Robin Cohen
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 3.612

8.  Frequency and impact of informant replacement in Alzheimer disease research.

Authors:  Joshua D Grill; Yan Zhou; Jason Karlawish; David Elashoff
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.703

9.  Patient-Reported Outcomes and Evidence-Based Practice in Speech-Language Pathology.

Authors:  Matthew L Cohen; William D Hula
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 2.408

10.  The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare International Consensus Workshop.

Authors:  Catherine J Evans; Hamid Benalia; Nancy J Preston; Gunn Grande; Marjolein Gysels; Vicky Short; Barbara A Daveson; Claudia Bausewein; Chris Todd; Irene J Higginson
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2013-04-28       Impact factor: 3.612

View more
  3 in total

1.  Agreement between older adult patient and caregiver proxy symptom reports.

Authors:  Kurt Kroenke; Timothy E Stump; Patrick O Monahan
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2022-05-14

2.  Preferences for home care to enable home death among adult patients with cancer in late palliative phase - a grounded theory study.

Authors:  Toril Merete Nysæter; Cecilia Olsson; Tuva Sandsdalen; Bodil Wilde-Larsson; Reidun Hov; Maria Larsson
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 3.234

Review 3.  Key considerations to reduce or address respondent burden in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection.

Authors:  Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi; Jessica Roydhouse; Samantha Cruz Rivera; Paul Kamudoni; Peter Schache; Roger Wilson; Richard Stephens; Melanie Calvert
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-10-12       Impact factor: 17.694

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.