Modern perspectives of measurement validation emphasize justification of inferences based on patient-reported outcome scores: Seventh paper in a series on patient reported outcomes

Richard Sawatzky, Eric K H Chan, Bruno D. Zumbo, Sara Ahmed, Susan J. Bartlett, Clifton Bingham, William Gardner, Jeffrey Jutai, Ayse Kuspinar, Tolulope Sajobi, Lisa M. Lix

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Obtaining the patient's view about the outcome of care is an essential component of patient-centered care. Many patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for different purposes have been developed since the 1960s. Measurement validation is fundamental in the development, evaluation, and use of PRO instruments. Objectives: This paper provides a review of modern perspectives of measurement validation in relation to the followings three questions as applied to PROs: (1) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons between groups and individuals? (2) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons over time? and (3) What are the value implications, including personal and societal consequences, of using PRO scores? Discussion: Measurement validation is an ongoing process that involves the accumulation of evidence regarding the justification of inferences, actions, and decisions based on measurement scores. These include inferences pertaining to comparisons between groups and comparisons over time as well as consideration of value implications of using PRO scores. Personal and societal consequences must be examined as part of a comprehensive approach to measurement validation. The answers to these three questions are fundamental to the the validity of different types of inferences, actions, and decisions made on PRO scores in health research, health care administration, and clinical practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

Fingerprint

Patient-Centered Care
Health Services Research
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Health

Keywords

  • Messick
  • Patient-centered care
  • Patient-reported outcomes
  • Psychometrics
  • Response shift
  • Validation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology

Cite this

Modern perspectives of measurement validation emphasize justification of inferences based on patient-reported outcome scores : Seventh paper in a series on patient reported outcomes. / Sawatzky, Richard; Chan, Eric K H; Zumbo, Bruno D.; Ahmed, Sara; Bartlett, Susan J.; Bingham, Clifton; Gardner, William; Jutai, Jeffrey; Kuspinar, Ayse; Sajobi, Tolulope; Lix, Lisa M.

In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sawatzky, Richard ; Chan, Eric K H ; Zumbo, Bruno D. ; Ahmed, Sara ; Bartlett, Susan J. ; Bingham, Clifton ; Gardner, William ; Jutai, Jeffrey ; Kuspinar, Ayse ; Sajobi, Tolulope ; Lix, Lisa M. / Modern perspectives of measurement validation emphasize justification of inferences based on patient-reported outcome scores : Seventh paper in a series on patient reported outcomes. In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2016.
@article{c30970082b084797af878ff6e3b32a97,
title = "Modern perspectives of measurement validation emphasize justification of inferences based on patient-reported outcome scores: Seventh paper in a series on patient reported outcomes",
abstract = "Background: Obtaining the patient's view about the outcome of care is an essential component of patient-centered care. Many patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for different purposes have been developed since the 1960s. Measurement validation is fundamental in the development, evaluation, and use of PRO instruments. Objectives: This paper provides a review of modern perspectives of measurement validation in relation to the followings three questions as applied to PROs: (1) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons between groups and individuals? (2) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons over time? and (3) What are the value implications, including personal and societal consequences, of using PRO scores? Discussion: Measurement validation is an ongoing process that involves the accumulation of evidence regarding the justification of inferences, actions, and decisions based on measurement scores. These include inferences pertaining to comparisons between groups and comparisons over time as well as consideration of value implications of using PRO scores. Personal and societal consequences must be examined as part of a comprehensive approach to measurement validation. The answers to these three questions are fundamental to the the validity of different types of inferences, actions, and decisions made on PRO scores in health research, health care administration, and clinical practice.",
keywords = "Messick, Patient-centered care, Patient-reported outcomes, Psychometrics, Response shift, Validation",
author = "Richard Sawatzky and Chan, {Eric K H} and Zumbo, {Bruno D.} and Sara Ahmed and Bartlett, {Susan J.} and Clifton Bingham and William Gardner and Jeffrey Jutai and Ayse Kuspinar and Tolulope Sajobi and Lix, {Lisa M.}",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.12.002",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Epidemiology",
issn = "0895-4356",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Modern perspectives of measurement validation emphasize justification of inferences based on patient-reported outcome scores

T2 - Seventh paper in a series on patient reported outcomes

AU - Sawatzky, Richard

AU - Chan, Eric K H

AU - Zumbo, Bruno D.

AU - Ahmed, Sara

AU - Bartlett, Susan J.

AU - Bingham, Clifton

AU - Gardner, William

AU - Jutai, Jeffrey

AU - Kuspinar, Ayse

AU - Sajobi, Tolulope

AU - Lix, Lisa M.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Background: Obtaining the patient's view about the outcome of care is an essential component of patient-centered care. Many patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for different purposes have been developed since the 1960s. Measurement validation is fundamental in the development, evaluation, and use of PRO instruments. Objectives: This paper provides a review of modern perspectives of measurement validation in relation to the followings three questions as applied to PROs: (1) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons between groups and individuals? (2) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons over time? and (3) What are the value implications, including personal and societal consequences, of using PRO scores? Discussion: Measurement validation is an ongoing process that involves the accumulation of evidence regarding the justification of inferences, actions, and decisions based on measurement scores. These include inferences pertaining to comparisons between groups and comparisons over time as well as consideration of value implications of using PRO scores. Personal and societal consequences must be examined as part of a comprehensive approach to measurement validation. The answers to these three questions are fundamental to the the validity of different types of inferences, actions, and decisions made on PRO scores in health research, health care administration, and clinical practice.

AB - Background: Obtaining the patient's view about the outcome of care is an essential component of patient-centered care. Many patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for different purposes have been developed since the 1960s. Measurement validation is fundamental in the development, evaluation, and use of PRO instruments. Objectives: This paper provides a review of modern perspectives of measurement validation in relation to the followings three questions as applied to PROs: (1) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons between groups and individuals? (2) What evidence is needed to warrant comparisons over time? and (3) What are the value implications, including personal and societal consequences, of using PRO scores? Discussion: Measurement validation is an ongoing process that involves the accumulation of evidence regarding the justification of inferences, actions, and decisions based on measurement scores. These include inferences pertaining to comparisons between groups and comparisons over time as well as consideration of value implications of using PRO scores. Personal and societal consequences must be examined as part of a comprehensive approach to measurement validation. The answers to these three questions are fundamental to the the validity of different types of inferences, actions, and decisions made on PRO scores in health research, health care administration, and clinical practice.

KW - Messick

KW - Patient-centered care

KW - Patient-reported outcomes

KW - Psychometrics

KW - Response shift

KW - Validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011319825&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011319825&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.12.002

DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.12.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 27998744

AN - SCOPUS:85011319825

JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

SN - 0895-4356

ER -