Literature DB >> 34657279

A philosophical perspective on the development and application of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs).

Keith Ashton Meadows1.   

Abstract

Questionnaires are a common method in healthcare and clinical research to collect self-reported data on patients' behaviour and outcomes rather than the clinician's perspective. As a consequence there is a plethora of questionnaires and rating forms developed to measure a range of concepts such as health-related quality of life and health status. Given that these measures have been developed within a nomothetic paradigm to enhance our understanding of peoples self-perceived health status by translating complex personal feelings and experiences into a simple numeric score, the patient's illness narrative is lost along the way. This commentary discusses the limitations of the nomothetic approach as completion of a questionnaire is a social and contextually orientated activity and that their development is best viewed within the philosophical tradition of pragmatism, based on sound qualitative methods and rigorous psychometric testing. The commentary discusses the philosophical orientation underpinning PROM development and argues the case for a pragmatic epistemology based on a mixed methods research paradigm which goes beyond the current practice of informing the content validity of a PROM in the early phase of its development but to work towards developing a more composite and holistic picture through mixed methods in the interpretation of a patient's PROM score. Therefore, it is argued that the quality of data obtained will be enhanced but, also importantly and rightly places the participant at the centre of the research.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Constructivism; Epistemological paradigms; Health status; Mixed methods; PROM development; Patient-reported outcome measures; Quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34657279     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-021-03016-8

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


  26 in total

1.  Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century.

Authors:  R D Hays; L S Morales; S P Reise
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Conceptual model of health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Carol Estwing Ferrans; Julie Johnson Zerwic; Jo Ellen Wilbur; Janet L Larson
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.176

3.  Putting Wilson and Cleary to the test: analysis of a HRQOL conceptual model using structural equation modeling.

Authors:  Karen H Sousa; Oi-Man Kwok
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Philosophical ruminations on measurement: methodological orientations of patient reported outcome measures (PROMS).

Authors:  Joanne Neale; John Strang
Journal:  J Ment Health       Date:  2015-06

5.  A theoretical framework for patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Leah McClimans
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2010-06

6.  Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes.

Authors:  I B Wilson; P D Cleary
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-01-04       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Patient-reported outcomes: conceptual issues.

Authors:  Margaret L Rothman; Philippe Beltran; Joseph C Cappelleri; Joseph Lipscomb; Bonnie Teschendorf
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 8.  Systematic review of health-related quality of life models.

Authors:  Tamilyn Bakas; Susan M McLennon; Janet S Carpenter; Janice M Buelow; Julie L Otte; Kathleen M Hanna; Marsha L Ellett; Kimberly A Hadler; Janet L Welch
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 3.186

Review 9.  Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures: a scoping review.

Authors:  Bianca Wiering; Dolf de Boer; Diana Delnoij
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 10.  How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis.

Authors:  Joanne Greenhalgh; Kate Gooding; Elizabeth Gibbons; Sonia Dalkin; Judy Wright; Jose Valderas; Nick Black
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2018-09-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.