Search

Objectives: This study aimed to develop and assess the content validity of a patient-reported outcomes (PROs) instrument to measure symptoms and impacts experienced by patients with active multiple myeloma (MM).Methods: The PRO instrument was developed using an iterative, mixed-methods approach. The list of concepts was generated based on a review of existing evidence (qualitative studies and literature) and post hoc psychometric evaluations of 2 PRO instruments in 3 clinical trials. A total of 30 adult patients with MM from the United States participated in hybrid concept elicitation/cognitive debriefing interviews to validate the content validity of the newly developed PRO instrument. Translatability assessment was completed in 8 languages.Results: The item generation process resulted in 17 symptom and 9 impact concepts for evaluation. The concept elicitation interviews and analysis were based on the first 25 participants; evidence of saturation was observed. The cognitive debriefing interviews and analysis were based on the last 23 participants across 4 waves of interviews. On the basis patient feedback, 10 items were removed, and 1 item was added to the PRO instrument. The translatability assessment resulted in 1 minor revision. The multiple myeloma symptom and impact questionnaire (MySIm-Q) includes 11 symptom and 6 impact concepts, organized within 8 hypothesized subdomains, with each concept measured using a 5-point verbal rating scale and a 7-day recall period.Conclusions: The MySIm-Q instrument was developed using rigorous and mixed methodology and with direct input from patients who received a diagnosis of MM. The MySIm-Q has good content validity and is culturally relevant for use in global clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: New therapies in development for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, such as alirocumab, require administration by subcutaneous injections. There is a need to assess the acceptance of such treatments and their mode of administration.Objectives: To develop a novel patient-reported outcome measure, the Injection-Treatment Acceptance Questionnaire (I-TAQ), and assess its content validity using qualitative methods.Methods: Concepts generated from a literature and instrument review informed the initial drafting of 17 items in the I-TAQ, with item wording adapted from three existing instruments. Three rounds of qualitative interviews were conducted with 29 US-English speaking patients at high cardiovascular risk. Concept elicitation questioning was used to explore patients' treatment experiences followed by cognitive debriefing of the I-TAQ using "think-aloud" methods. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results: Qualitative analysis of concept elicitation data identified the following relevant concepts: perceived efficacy, side effects, self-efficacy, convenience, and overall acceptance. Seven (24%) patients discussed an initial fear of needles, but described this as subsiding with no impact on adherence. Five items were added after round one interviews, three of which were retained after round two testing in which two further items were added, forming the conceptually comprehensive 22-item I-TAQ. Patients demonstrated good understanding of item wording, instructions, response scales, and recall period.Conclusions: Successive rounds of in-depth interviews resulted in a treatment acceptance measure with strong content validity. Pending demonstration of its psychometric properties, the I-TAQ may prove to be a valuable measure of patients' perspectives toward being treated with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering therapies requiring subcutaneous injections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The importance of content validity in developing patient reported outcomes (PRO) instruments is stressed by both the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency. Content validity is the extent to which an instrument measures the important aspects of concepts developers or users purport it to assess. A PRO instrument measures the concepts most relevant and important to a patient''s condition and its treatment. For PRO instruments, items and domains as reflected in the scores of an instrument should be important to the target population and comprehensive with respect to patient concerns. Documentation of target population input in item generation, as well as evaluation of patient understanding through cognitive interviewing, can provide the evidence for content validity. Part 1 of this task force report covers elicitation of key concepts using qualitative focus groups and/or interviews to inform content and structure of a new PRO instrument. Building on qualitative interviews and focus groups used to elicit concepts, cognitive interviews help developers craft items that can be understood by respondents in the target population and can ultimately confirm that the final instrument is appropriate, comprehensive, and understandable in the target population. Part 2 details: 1) the methods for conducting cognitive interviews that address patient understanding of items, instructions, and response options; and 2) the methods for tracking item development through the various stages of research and preparing this tracking for submission to regulatory agencies. The task force report''s two parts are meant to be read together. They are intended to offer suggestions for good practice in planning, executing, and documenting qualitative studies that are used to support the content validity of PRO instruments to be used in medical product evaluation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Fragile X Syndrome (FXS) is a rare pediatric disorder that causes a range of developmental issues. Anxiety, social avoidance, irritability, and social unresponsiveness/lethargy represent the core behavioral symptoms of FXS. [Extracted from the article]