Abstract
Methods
Systematic literature searches were made to identify PROMs. Quality and acceptability was assessed against an appraisal framework,
which captured evidence of both the thoroughness and results of evaluations: evidence of measurement (reliability, validity,
responsiveness, interpretability, data quality/precision) and practical properties (feasibility, patient acceptability), and
the extent of active patient involvement was sought.
which captured evidence of both the thoroughness and results of evaluations: evidence of measurement (reliability, validity,
responsiveness, interpretability, data quality/precision) and practical properties (feasibility, patient acceptability), and
the extent of active patient involvement was sought.
Conclusions
The quality and acceptability of reviewed PROMs is limited, and recommendations for patient-reported assessment are difficult.
Significant methodological and quality issues in PROM development/evaluation were identified by the appraisal framework, which
must be addressed in future research. Clear discrepancies exist between what is measured in research and how patients define
their experience of CFS/ME. Future PROM development/evaluation must seek to involve patients more collaboratively to measure
outcomes of importance using relevant and credible methods of assessment.
Significant methodological and quality issues in PROM development/evaluation were identified by the appraisal framework, which
must be addressed in future research. Clear discrepancies exist between what is measured in research and how patients define
their experience of CFS/ME. Future PROM development/evaluation must seek to involve patients more collaboratively to measure
outcomes of importance using relevant and credible methods of assessment.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Pages 1-18
- DOI 10.1007/s11136-011-9921-8
- Authors
- Kirstie L. Haywood, Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL UK
- Sophie Staniszewska, Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL UK
- Sarah Chapman, Royal College of Nursing Institute, Whichford House, Oxford Business Park South, Oxford, OX4 UK
- Journal Quality of Life Research
- Online ISSN 1573-2649
- Print ISSN 0962-9343