Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Standard

Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions : cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility. / Boesen, Victor Brun; Nissen, Stine Birk; Groenvold, Mogens; Bjorner, Jakob Bue; Hegedüs, Laszlo; Bonnema, Steen Joop; Rasmussen, Åse Krogh; Feldt-Rasmussen, Ulla; Watt, Torquil.

In: Quality of Life Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, 04.2018, p. 1065–1076.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Boesen, VB, Nissen, SB, Groenvold, M, Bjorner, JB, Hegedüs, L, Bonnema, SJ, Rasmussen, ÅK, Feldt-Rasmussen, U & Watt, T 2018, 'Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility', Quality of Life Research, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1065–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

APA

Boesen, V. B., Nissen, S. B., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Hegedüs, L., Bonnema, S. J., Rasmussen, Å. K., Feldt-Rasmussen, U., & Watt, T. (2018). Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility. Quality of Life Research, 27(4), 1065–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

Vancouver

Boesen VB, Nissen SB, Groenvold M, Bjorner JB, Hegedüs L, Bonnema SJ et al. Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility. Quality of Life Research. 2018 Apr;27(4):1065–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

Author

Boesen, Victor Brun ; Nissen, Stine Birk ; Groenvold, Mogens ; Bjorner, Jakob Bue ; Hegedüs, Laszlo ; Bonnema, Steen Joop ; Rasmussen, Åse Krogh ; Feldt-Rasmussen, Ulla ; Watt, Torquil. / Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions : cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility. In: Quality of Life Research. 2018 ; Vol. 27, No. 4. pp. 1065–1076.

Bibtex

@article{43de9d87f1db4ae8a944c31671ab18f9,
title = "Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility",
abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item{\textquoteright}s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.",
keywords = "Cognitive interviewing, Ecological momentary assessments, Patient-reported outcomes, Quality-of-life measurement, Thyroid diseases",
author = "Boesen, {Victor Brun} and Nissen, {Stine Birk} and Mogens Groenvold and Bjorner, {Jakob Bue} and Laszlo Heged{\"u}s and Bonnema, {Steen Joop} and Rasmussen, {{\AA}se Krogh} and Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen and Torquil Watt",
year = "2018",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "1065–1076",
journal = "Quality of Life Research",
issn = "0962-9343",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions

T2 - cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility

AU - Boesen, Victor Brun

AU - Nissen, Stine Birk

AU - Groenvold, Mogens

AU - Bjorner, Jakob Bue

AU - Hegedüs, Laszlo

AU - Bonnema, Steen Joop

AU - Rasmussen, Åse Krogh

AU - Feldt-Rasmussen, Ulla

AU - Watt, Torquil

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item’s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item’s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.

KW - Cognitive interviewing

KW - Ecological momentary assessments

KW - Patient-reported outcomes

KW - Quality-of-life measurement

KW - Thyroid diseases

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038077103&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

DO - 10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29243044

AN - SCOPUS:85038077103

VL - 27

SP - 1065

EP - 1076

JO - Quality of Life Research

JF - Quality of Life Research

SN - 0962-9343

IS - 4

ER -

ID: 188233296