53
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patient reported outcome measures in rare diseases: a narrative review

      review-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

          Background

          Rare diseases can lead to a significant reduction in quality of life for patients and their families. Ensuring the patients voice is central to clinical decision making is key to delivering, evaluating and understanding the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to capture the patient’s views about their health status and facilitate our understanding of the impact of these diseases and their treatments on patient’s quality of life and symptoms.

          Main text

          This review explores some of the current issues around the utilisation of PROMs in rare diseases, including small patient populations and dearth of valid PROMs. Difficulties in validating new or current PROMs for use in clinical trials and research are discussed. The review highlights potential solutions for some of the issues outlined in the review and the implementation of PROMs in research and clinical practice are discussed.

          Conclusion

          Patient input throughout the development of PROMs including qualitative research is essential to ensure that outcomes that matter to people living with rare disease are appropriately captured. Given the large number of rare diseases, small numbers of patients living with each condition and the cost of instrument development, creative and pragmatic solutions to PROM development and use may be necessary. Solutions include qualitative interviews, modern psychometrics and resources such as item banking and computer adaptive testing. Use of PROMs in rare disease research and clinical practice offers the potential to improve patient care and clinical outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline

          Background In cooperation with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) initiative aimed to develop a guideline on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes (i.e., constructs or domains) included in a “Core Outcome Set” (COS). A COS is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a specific disease or trial population. Methods Informed by a literature review to identify potentially relevant tasks on outcome measurement instrument selection, a Delphi study was performed among a panel of international experts, representing diverse stakeholders. In three consecutive rounds, panelists were asked to rate the importance of different tasks in the selection of outcome measurement instruments, to justify their choices, and to add other relevant tasks. Consensus was defined as being achieved when 70 % or more of the panelists agreed and when fewer than 15 % of the panelists disagreed. Results Of the 481 invited experts, 120 agreed to participate of whom 95 (79 %) completed the first Delphi questionnaire. We reached consensus on four main steps in the selection of outcome measurement instruments for COS: Step 1, conceptual considerations; Step 2, finding existing outcome measurement instruments, by means of a systematic review and/or a literature search; Step 3, quality assessment of outcome measurement instruments, by means of the evaluation of the measurement properties and feasibility aspects of outcome measurement instruments; and Step 4, generic recommendations on the selection of outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS (consensus ranged from 70 to 99 %). Conclusions This study resulted in a consensus-based guideline on the methods for selecting outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS. This guideline can be used by COS developers in defining how to measure core outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1555-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The European KIDSCREEN approach to measure quality of life and well-being in children: development, current application, and future advances

            Purpose The KIDSCREEN questionnaires were developed by a collaborative effort of European pediatric researchers for use in epidemiologic public health surveys, clinical intervention studies, and research projects. The article gives an overview of the development of the tool, summarizes its extensive applications in Europe, and describes the development of a new computerized adaptive test (KIDS-CAT) based on KIDSCREEN experiences. Methods The KIDSCREEN versions (self-report and proxy versions with 52, 27, and 10 items) were simultaneously developed in 13 different European countries to warrant cross-cultural applicability, using methods based on classical test theory (CTT: descriptive statistics, CFA and MAP, internal consistency, retest reliability measures) and item response theory (IRT: Rasch modeling, DIF analyses, etc.). The KIDS-CAT was developed (in cooperation with the US pediatric PROMIS project) based on archival data of European KIDSCREEN health surveys using IRT more extensively (IRC). Results Research has shown that the KIDSCREEN is a reliable, valid, sensitive, and conceptually/linguistically appropriate QoL measure in 38 countries/languages by now. European and national norm data are available. New insights from KIDSCREEN studies stimulate pediatric health care. Based on KIDSCREEN, the Kids-CAT promises to facilitate a very efficient, precise, as well as reliable and valid assessment of QoL. Conclusions The KIDSCREEN has standardized QoL measurement in Europe in children as a valid and cross-cultural comparable tool. The Kids-CAT has the potential to further advance pediatric health measurement and care via Internet application.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Multinational trials-recommendations on the translations required, approaches to using the same language in different countries, and the approaches to support pooling the data: the ISPOR Patient-Reported Outcomes Translation and Linguistic Validation Good Research Practices Task Force report.

              With the internationalization of clinical trial programs, there is an increased need to translate and culturally adapt patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Although guidelines for good practices in translation and linguistic validation are available, the ISPOR Patient-Reported Outcomes Translation and Linguistic Validation Task Force identified a number of areas where they felt that further discussion around methods and best practices would be beneficial. The areas identified by the team were as follows: 1) the selection of the languages required for multinational trials; 2) the approaches suggested when the same language is required across two or more countries; and 3) the assessment of measurement equivalence to support the aggregation of data from different countries. The task force addressed these three areas, reviewed the available literature, and had multiple discussions to develop this report. Decision aid tools have also been developed and presented for the selection of languages and the approaches suggested for the use of the same language in different countries. It is hoped that this report and the decision tools proposed will assist those involved with multinational trials to 1) decide on the translations required for each country; 2) choose the approach to use when the same language is spoken in more than one country; and 3) choose methods to gather evidence to support the pooling of data collected using different language versions of the same tool.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                a.l.slade@bham.ac.uk
                Journal
                Orphanet J Rare Dis
                Orphanet J Rare Dis
                Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
                BioMed Central (London )
                1750-1172
                23 April 2018
                23 April 2018
                2018
                : 13
                : 61
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7486, GRID grid.6572.6, Centre for Patient Reported Outcome Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, , University of Birmingham Edgbaston, ; Birmingham, B15 2TT UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7486, GRID grid.6572.6, Institute of Applied Health Research, , University of Birmingham, ; Birmingham, UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0376 6589, GRID grid.412563.7, University Hospital Birmingham, ; Birmingham, UK
                [4 ]Birmingham Childrens and Womens Hospital, Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
                [5 ]Birmingham Health Partners, Birmingham, UK
                [6 ]Public Health England, Birmingham, UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2827-7741
                Article
                810
                10.1186/s13023-018-0810-x
                5914068
                29688860
                ff9195a6-1c54-4944-9473-871a3753190a
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 20 November 2017
                : 16 April 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: Metchley Park Medical Society
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                rare diseases,rare disorders,patient reported outcome measures,outcome assessments,quality of life

                Comments

                Comment on this article