↓ Skip to main content

Interviewing to develop Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) measures for clinical research: eliciting patients’ experience

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
133 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
215 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interviewing to develop Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) measures for clinical research: eliciting patients’ experience
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1477-7525-12-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Brédart, Alexia Marrel, Linda Abetz-Webb, Kathy Lasch, Catherine Acquadro

Abstract

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures must provide evidence that their development followed a rigorous process for ensuring their content validity. To this end, the collection of data is performed through qualitative interviews that allow for the elicitation of in-depth spontaneous reports of the patients' experiences with their condition and/or its treatment. This paper provides a review of qualitative research applied to PRO measure development. A clear definition of what is a qualitative research interview is given as well as information about the form and content of qualitative interviews required for developing PRO measures. Particular attention is paid to the description of interviewing approaches (e.g., semi-structured and in-depth interviews, individual vs. focus group interviews). Information about how to get prepared for a qualitative interview is provided with the description of how to develop discussion guides for exploratory or cognitive interviews. Interviewing patients to obtain knowledge regarding their illness experience requires interpersonal and communication skills to facilitate patients' expression. Those skills are described in details, as well as the skills needed to facilitate focus groups and to interview children, adolescents and the elderly. Special attention is also given to quality assurance and interview training. The paper ends on ethical considerations since interviewing for the development of PROs is performed in a context of illness and vulnerability. Therefore, it is all the more important that, in addition to soliciting informed consent, respectful interactions be ensured throughout the interview process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 209 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 16%
Researcher 26 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 57 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 23%
Social Sciences 24 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 11%
Psychology 16 7%
Computer Science 6 3%
Other 31 14%
Unknown 66 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2014.
All research outputs
#14,190,698
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,128
of 2,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,668
of 307,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#26
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,157 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,216 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.