5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development of the generic, multidimensional Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q) through systematic literature review, expert surveys and qualitative interviews

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Patients’ expectations—as a central mechanism of placebo and nocebo effects—are an important predictor of health outcomes. However, the lack of a way to assess expectations across different settings restricts progress in understanding the role of expectations and to quantify their importance in medical and psychological treatments. The aim of this study was to develop a theory-based, generic, multidimensional measure assessing patient expectations of medical and psychological treatments.

          Design

          The Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q) was developed based on the integrative model of expectations and a systematic literature review of treatment expectation scales. After creating a comprehensive item pool, the scale was further refined by use of expert ratings and patient interviews.

          Setting

          Patients were recruited in primary care at two hospitals in Hamburg, Germany.

          Participants

          13 scientific experts participated in the expert survey. 11 patients waiting for psychological or surgical treatments participated in the qualitative interviews.

          Results

          The 2×2×2 multidimensional structure of the TEX-Q assesses two expectation constructs (probabilistic vs value-based) across two outcome domains with two valences (direct benefits and adverse events, broader positive and negative impact), plus process and behavioural control expectations. We examined 583 items from 38 scales identified in the systematic review and developed 78 initial items. Content validity was then rated by experts according to item fit and comprehensibility. The best 53 items were further evaluated for comprehensibility, acceptability, phrasing preference and understanding by interviewing patients prior to treatment using the ‘think aloud’ technique. This resulted in a first 35-item version of the TEX-Q.

          Conclusions

          The TEX-Q is a generic, multidimensional measure to assess patient expectations of medical and psychological treatments and allows comparison of the impact of multidimensional expectations across different conditions. The final TEX-Q will be available after psychometric validation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Research Synthesis: The Practice of Cognitive Interviewing

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Response expectancy as a determinant of experience and behavior.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Self-efficacy and self-management after stroke: a systematic review.

              The purpose of this review is to examine (1) the influence of self-efficacy on rehabilitation outcomes post-stroke, and (2) the evidence to support self-management interventions based on self-efficacy principals for stroke survivors. Medline, Embase, Psychlit, Web of Science, AMED and Cochrane Databases for systematic reviews databases were searched for relevant articles in English between 2000 and ending in July 2009. Articles included (1) primary research testing relationships between self-efficacy and rehabilitation outcomes including the measuring impairment and activity or participation in a stroke population, and (2) research testing efficacy and effectiveness of self-management interventions designed specifically for a stoke population in which the principle theoretical framework is self-efficacy or a similar control cognition. Methodological quality appraisal and data extraction was carried out by two reviewers. Of the 104 articles that were identified by the search, 22 met the criteria to be included in the review. There is evidence that self-efficacy is an important variable associated with various outcomes post-stroke. These outcomes include quality of life or perceived health status, depression, ADL and, to a certain extent, physical functioning. Further empirical evidence is needed to extend these findings, and to determine whether self-efficacy has additional predictive value over and beyond the objective measures of impairment. There is also emerging evidence of benefits to be gained from programmes that target self-management based on self-efficacy principles; however, the optimal format of delivering these interventions for stroke survivors is not clear. There is a need for researchers, to work together with other stakeholders to develop and test interventions that can support self-management skills and confidence to make continued progress after stroke. This could help to reduce some of the negative consequences of stroke such as reduced quality of life and social isolation. © 2011 Informa UK, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2020
                20 August 2020
                : 10
                : 8
                : e036169
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentPsychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg, Germany
                [2 ]departmentPsychological Medicine , University of Auckland , Auckland, New Zealand
                [3 ]departmentClinical Psychology and Psychotherapy , Psychologische Hochschule Berlin , Berlin, Germany
                [4 ]departmentDepartment of Clinical Psychology , Helmut Schmidt University, University of the Federal Armed Forces , Hamburg, Germany
                [5 ]departmentDepartment of Systems Neuroscience , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg, Germany
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Meike Shedden-Mora; m.shedden-mora@ 123456uke.de
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9680-1528
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4220-3378
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6337-2480
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5044-5540
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2191-0495
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2023-3824
                Article
                bmjopen-2019-036169
                10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036169
                7440833
                32819942
                68eee1f6-894b-4d82-9c20-494101e15bec
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 03 December 2019
                : 29 May 2020
                : 05 June 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Medical Faculty Young Researchers Found, Hamburg University;
                Award ID: NWF-18/10
                Categories
                Global Health
                1506
                1699
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                general medicine (see internal medicine),mental health,preventive medicine,qualitative research,statistics & research methods,therapeutics

                Comments

                Comment on this article