Content Validity of the Modified Functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (f-SARA) Instrument in Spinocerebellar Ataxia.

The functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (f-SARA) assesses Gait, Stance, Sitting, and Speech. It was developed as a potentially clinically meaningful measure of spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) progression for clinical trial use. Here, we evaluated content validity of the f-SARA. Qualitative interviews were conducted among individuals with SCA1 (n = 1) and SCA3 (n = 6) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) with SCA expertise (USA, n = 5; Europe, n = 3). Interviews evaluated symptoms and signs of SCA and relevance of f-SARA concepts for SCA. HCP cognitive debriefing was conducted. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed by ATLAS.TI software. Individuals with SCA1 and 3 reported 85 symptoms, signs, and impacts of SCA. All indicated difficulties with walking, stance, balance, speech, fatigue, emotions, and work. All individuals with SCA1 and 3 considered Gait, Stance, and Speech relevant f-SARA concepts; 3 considered Sitting relevant (42.9%). All HCPs considered Gait and Speech relevant; 5 (62.5%) indicated Stance was relevant. Sitting was considered a late-stage disease indicator. Most HCPs suggested inclusion of appendicular items would enhance clinical relevance. Cognitive debriefing supported clarity and comprehension of f-SARA. Maintaining current abilities on f-SARA items for 1 year was considered meaningful for most individuals with SCA1 and 3. All HCPs considered meaningful changes as stability in f-SARA score over 1-2 years, 1-2-point change in total f-SARA score, and deviation from natural history. These results support content validity of f-SARA for assessing SCA disease progression in clinical trials.

Is IQWiG's 15% Threshold Universally Applicable in Assessing the Clinical Relevance of Patient-Reported Outcomes Changes? An ISPOR Special Interest Group Report.

This article discusses a recent methodological change to assess the additional benefit of drug intervention by the German Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss), a key stakeholder in EUnetHTA21 (European Network for Health Technology Assessment joint consortium for future EU HTA regulation), methodological workstream. The German Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss) set a universal individual response threshold at ≥ 15% of the scale range of the measurement instrument, for all patient-reported outcomes, to achieve an additional benefit rating for a given pharmaceutical intervention. This approach is originally based on a corresponding recommendation from the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. The merits of this approach are reviewed from various perspectives, including the evidence basis, statistical and psychometric considerations, and regulatory perspectives by the ISPOR Clinical Outcomes Assessment Special Interest Group's multistakeholder group of authors (academia, contract research organizations, and industry). Particular focus is placed on the patient perspective within the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care approach. The article development incorporated feedback from ISPOR members during well-attended ISPOR US and European conference presentations and 2 formal rounds of written review. The authors concluded that the ≥ 15% response threshold is incongruent with previously defined and scientifically established thresholds and is not well-suited for universal implementation. Further scientific evidence and discussion among all stakeholders are needed, especially should this universal rule be considered in the context of future joint clinical assessments of health technologies in the European Union scheduled from 2025 onward.

Identifying evidence of effectiveness in the co-creation of research: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the international healthcare literature.

BACKGROUND: To investigate and address the evidence gap on the effectiveness of co-creation/production in international health research. METHODS: An initial systematic search of previous reviews published by 22 July 2017 in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science. We extracted reported aims, elements and outcomes of co-creation/production from 50 reviews; however, reviews rarely tested effectiveness against intended outcomes. We therefore checked the reference lists in 13 included systematic reviews that cited quantitative studies involving the public/patients in the design and/or implementation of research projects to conduct meta-analyses on their effectiveness using standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: Twenty-six primary studies were included, showing moderate positive effects for community functions (SMD = 0.56, 95%CI = 0.29-0.84, n = 11) and small positive effects for physical health (SMD = 0.25, 95%CI = 0.07-0.42, n = 9), health-promoting behaviour (SMD = 0.14, 95%CI = 0.03-0.26, n = 11), self-efficacy (SMD = 0.34, 95%CI = 0.01-0.67, n = 3) and health service access/receipt (SMD = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.21-0.52, n = 12). Non-academic stakeholders that co-created more than one research stage showed significantly favourable mental health outcomes. However, co-creation was rarely extended to later stages (evaluation/dissemination), with few studies specifically with ethnic minority groups. CONCLUSIONS: The co-creation of research may improve several health-related outcomes and public health more broadly, but research is lacking on its longer term effects.

Quality of Life and Utility Measurement in a Large Clinical Trial Sample of Patients with Mild to Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: Determinants and Level of Changes Observed.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance (in terms of responsiveness to change, associations with other criterion standards, and indicators of Alzheimer's disease [AD] severity) of a quality-of-life measure (Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease [QOL-AD]) and a health utility measure (Health Utilities Index Mark 3 [HUI-3]) from two recently completed clinical trials of a new drug for AD. METHODS: Change from baseline scores was calculated, and treatment effects were analyzed using mixed models for repeated measures. Three separate models were then estimated to examine the association between the quality-of-life/utility end points and the clinical and other health outcome end points measured during the trials, including cognition, function, behavior, and dependence. RESULTS: The performance of the two measures differed. Subject-assessed QOL-AD was found to be weakly associated with clinical measures of cognition, and with caregiver reports of function, behavior, and dependence, and showed little movement over time and did not appear to differ by baseline AD severity. Proxy-assessed QOL-AD scores were consistently lower than subject-assessed scores, and the level of decline in QOL-AD was greater using proxy-assessed QOL-AD. Proxy-assessed HUI-3 scores were more strongly associated with clinical measures of cognition, function, behavior, and dependence than the subject- and proxy-assessed QOL-AD scores. Larger proportionate changes over 78 weeks were observed with HUI-3 scores and greater separation in HUI-3 scores by baseline severity. CONCLUSIONS: Subject-assessed QOL-AD is less likely than proxy-assessed QOL-AD to respond to changes in clinical measures used to track progression in clinical trials of subjects with mild to moderate AD. Proxy-assessed HUI-3 assessments were more in line with other outcome assessments and could therefore be better outcome measures to evaluate clinical progression in mild to moderate AD.

The PROactive innovative conceptual framework on physical activity.

Although physical activity is considered an important therapeutic target in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), what "physical activity" means to COPD patients and how their perspective is best measured is poorly understood. We designed a conceptual framework, guiding the development and content validation of two patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments on physical activity (PROactive PRO instruments). 116 patients from four European countries with diverse demographics and COPD phenotypes participated in three consecutive qualitative studies (63% male, age mean±sd 66±9 years, 35% Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stage III-IV). 23 interviews and eight focus groups (n = 54) identified the main themes and candidate items of the framework. 39 cognitive debriefings allowed the clarity of the items and instructions to be optimised. Three themes emerged, i.e. impact of COPD on amount of physical activity, symptoms experienced during physical activity, and adaptations made to facilitate physical activity. The themes were similar irrespective of country, demographic or disease characteristics. Iterative rounds of appraisal and refinement of candidate items resulted in 30 items with a daily recall period and 34 items with a 7-day recall period. For the first time, our approach provides comprehensive insight on physical activity from the COPD patients' perspective. The PROactive PRO instruments' content validity represents the pivotal basis for empirically based item reduction and validation.

Patient-reported Outcome Measurement and Reporting for Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Literature Review.

CONTEXT: In the oncology setting, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide important data that help to ensure patient-relevant endpoints are captured and reported. Use of this information for treatment decision-making by clinicians and patients in real-world settings is facilitated by consistent and transparent reporting of trial methods. OBJECTIVE: To identify and compare PROMs used in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) trials in terms of the rationale for the choice of measure, endpoint hierarchy (primary, secondary, exploratory), assessment time points, statistical methods, and statistical metrics for interpretation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature review via searches of four online databases (2016-2021) and recent conference abstracts (2019-2021) identified 2616 articles, of which 33 were included in the review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Among the 33 clinical studies included, 19 different PROMs were identified: three kidney cancer-specific scales, two cancer-specific scales, two generic scales, and 12 symptom-specific scales. The endpoint hierarchy for patient reported outcome (PRO) assessment was reported in 42% of the studies; one study included PROs as a primary endpoint. Reporting of time points, minimal important differences, and statistical analyses was highly heterogeneous. CONCLUSIONS: A diverse range of PROMs have been included in clinical studies for patients with advanced/metastatic RCC. Prespecified analyses for PRO assessments were generally not stated, while analytical methods and reporting varied. An improvement in alignment across studies would better inform regulatory, market-access, reimbursement, and clinical decision-making to improve patient care. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed how the impact of cancer therapies on health outcomes from the patient's point of view is being measured in clinical trials for kidney cancer. The techniques and reporting varied across trials. Standardisation of how these data are captured and reported may improve care and decision-making for patients with kidney cancer.

Patient-reported physical activity questionnaires: a systematic review of content and format.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with chronic illness are limited in their physical activities. This systematic review evaluates the content and format of patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires that measure physical activity in elderly and chronically ill populations. METHODS: Questionnaires were identified by a systematic literature search of electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsychINFO & CINAHL), hand searches (reference sections and PROQOLID database) and expert input. A qualitative analysis was conducted to assess the content and format of the questionnaires and a Venn diagram was produced to illustrate this. Each stage of the review process was conducted by at least two independent reviewers. RESULTS: 104 questionnaires fulfilled our criteria. From these, 182 physical activity domains and 1965 items were extracted. Initial qualitative analysis of the domains found 11 categories. Further synthesis of the domains found 4 broad categories: 'physical activity related to general activities and mobility', 'physical activity related to activities of daily living', 'physical activity related to work, social or leisure time activities', and '(disease-specific) symptoms related to physical activity'. The Venn diagram showed that no questionnaires covered all 4 categories and that the '(disease-specific) symptoms related to physical activity' category was often not combined with the other categories. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of questionnaires with a broad range of physical activity content were identified. Although the content could be broadly organised, there was no consensus on the content and format of physical activity PRO questionnaires in elderly and chronically ill populations. Nevertheless, this systematic review will help investigators to select a physical activity PRO questionnaire that best serves their research question and context.

A comprehensive systematic review of the development process of 104 patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for physical activity in chronically ill and elderly people.

BACKGROUND: Capturing dimensions of physical activity relevant to patients may provide a unique perspective for clinical studies of chronically ill patients. However, the quality of the development of existing instruments is uncertain. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the development process of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments including their initial validation to measure physical activity in chronically ill or elderly patient populations. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search of electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, Cinahl) and hand searches. We included studies describing the original development of fully structured instruments measuring dimensions of physical activity or related constructs in chronically ills or elderly. We broadened the population to elderly because they are likely to share physical activity limitations. At least two reviewers independently conducted title and abstract screening and full text assessment. We evaluated instruments in terms of their aim, items identification and selection, domain development, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, validity and responsiveness. RESULTS: Of the 2542 references from the database search and 89 from the hand search, 103 full texts which covered 104 instruments met our inclusion criteria. For almost half of the instruments the authors clearly described the aim of the instruments before the scales were developed. For item identification, patient input was used in 38% of the instruments and in 32% adaptation of existing scales and/or unsystematic literature searches were the only sources for the generation of items. For item reduction, in 56% of the instruments patient input was used and in 33% the item reduction process was not clearly described. Test-retest reliability was assessed for 61%, validity for 85% and responsiveness to change for 19% of the instruments. CONCLUSIONS: Many PRO instruments exist to measure dimensions of physical activity in chronically ill and elderly patient populations, which reflects the relevance of this outcome. However, the development processes often lacked definitions of the instruments' aims and patient input. If PROs for physical activity were to be used in clinical trials more attention needs to be paid to the establishment of content validity through patient input and to the assessment of their evaluative measurement properties.

Validity of instruments to measure physical activity may be questionable due to a lack of conceptual frameworks: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Guidance documents for the development and validation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) advise the use of conceptual frameworks, which outline the structure of the concept that a PRO aims to measure. It is unknown whether currently available PROs are based on conceptual frameworks. This study, which was limited to a specific case, had the following aims: (i) to identify conceptual frameworks of physical activity in chronic respiratory patients or similar populations (chronic heart disease patients or the elderly) and (ii) to assess whether the development and validation of PROs to measure physical activity in these populations were based on a conceptual framework of physical activity. METHODS: Two systematic reviews were conducted through searches of the Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cinahl databases prior to January 2010. RESULTS: In the first review, only 2 out of 581 references pertaining to physical activity in the defined populations provided a conceptual framework of physical activity in COPD patients. In the second review, out of 103 studies developing PROs to measure physical activity or related constructs, none were based on a conceptual framework of physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings raise concerns about how the large body of evidence from studies that use physical activity PRO instruments should be evaluated by health care providers, guideline developers, and regulatory agencies.

Do 'alternative' help-seeking strategies affect primary care service use? A survey of help-seeking for mental distress.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies suggest that only some distressed individuals seek help from primary care and that pathways to mental health care appear to be ethnically patterned. However few research studies examine how people with common mental disorder manage their mental distress, which help-seeking strategies they employ and whether these are patterned by ethnicity? This study investigates alternative help-seeking strategies in a multi-ethnic community and examines the relationship with primary care use. METHODS: Participants were recruited from four GP practice registers and 14 community groups in East London. Of 268 participants, 117 had a common mental disorder according to a valid and structured interview schedule (CIS-R). Participants were of Bangladeshi, black Caribbean and White British ethnic background. For those with a common mental disorder, we examined self-reported help-seeking behaviour, perceived helpfulness of care givers, and associations with primary care service use. RESULTS: We found that alternative help-seeking such as talking to family about distress (OR 15.83, CI 3.9-64.5, P < .001), utilising traditional healers (OR 8.79, CI 1.98-38.93, p = .004), and severity of distress (1.11, CI 1.03-1.20, p = .006) was positively associated with primary care service use for people with a common mental disorder. Ethnic background influenced the choice of help-seeking strategies, but was less important in perceptions of their helpfulness. CONCLUSION: Primary care service use was strongly correlated with lay and community help-seeking. Alternative help-seeking was commonly employed in all ethnic groups. A large number of people believed mental distress could not be resolved or they did not know how to resolve it. The implications for health promotion and integrated care pathways are discussed.

Literature review to assemble the evidence for response scales used in patient-reported outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: In the development of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments, little documentation is provided on the justification of response scale selection. The selection of response scales is often based on the developers' preferences or therapeutic area conventions. The purpose of this literature review was to assemble evidence on the selection of response scale types, in PRO instruments. The literature search was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases. Secondary search was conducted on supplementary sources including reference lists of key articles, websites for major PRO-related working groups and consortia, and conference abstracts. Evidence on the selection of verbal rating scale (VRS), numeric rating scale (NRS), and visual analogue scale (VAS) was collated based on pre-determined categories pertinent to the development of PRO instruments: reliability, validity, and responsiveness of PRO instruments, select therapeutic areas, and optimal number of response scale options. RESULTS: A total of 6713 abstracts were reviewed; 186 full-text references included. There was a lack of consensus in the literature on the justification for response scale type based on the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of a PRO instrument. The type of response scale varied within the following therapeutic areas: asthma, cognition, depression, fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis, and oncology. The optimal number of response options depends on the construct, but quantitative evidence suggests that a 5-point or 6-point VRS was more informative and discriminative than fewer response options. CONCLUSIONS: The VRS, NRS, and VAS are acceptable response scale types in the development of PRO instruments. The empirical evidence on selection of response scales was inconsistent and, therefore, more empirical evidence needs to be generated. In the development of PRO instruments, it is important to consider the measurement properties and therapeutic area and provide justification for the selection of response scale type.

What Outcomes are Important for Gout Patients? In-Depth Qualitative Research into the Gout Patient Experience to Determine Optimal Endpoints for Evaluating Therapeutic Interventions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Characterized by sudden onset of severe joint pain, swelling, redness, and tenderness to touch, gout 'flare ups' have a substantial impact on quality of life (QoL). This research employed a patient-centered approach to explore the symptoms and impacts of gout, and assess the content validity of existing patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 US gout patients (non-tophaceous: n = 20, tophaceous: n = 10) and five expert rheumatologists. Each interview included both concept elicitation (CE) questioning to learn about the patient experience and cognitive debriefing to assess the content validity of three PRO instruments (HAQ-DI, GAQ, and TIQ-20). Nine of the patients provided further real-time qualitative data through a smart phone application. All qualitative data were subject to thematic analysis using Atlas.ti. Two patient advisors and three expert clinicians were engaged as advisors at key stages throughout the research. RESULTS: Interview and real-time data identified the same core symptoms and proximal impact concepts. Severe pain (typically in joints of extremities) was described as the cardinal symptom, often accompanied by swelling, redness, heat, sensitivity to touch, and stiffness. Domains of QoL impacted included physical functioning, sleep, daily activities, and work. The PRO instruments were generally well-understood by patients, but each included items with questionable relevance to at least some of the sample, dependent on the specific joints affected. CONCLUSIONS: Gout patients experience severe pain in affected joints, resulting in substantial limitations in physical functioning. Both the HAQ-DI and the TIQ-20 are useful for specific research purposes in the gout population, although modifications are recommended.

Response scale selection in adult pain measures: results from a literature review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this literature review was to examine the existing patient-reported outcome measurement literature to understand the empirical evidence supporting response scale selection in pain measurement for the adult population. METHODS: The search strategy involved a comprehensive, structured, literature review with multiple search objectives and search terms. RESULTS: The searched yielded 6918 abstracts which were reviewed against study criteria for eligibility across the adult pain objective. The review included 42 review articles, consensus guidelines, expert opinion pieces, and primary research articles providing insights into optimal response scale selection for pain assessment in the adult population. Based on the extensive and varied literature on pain assessments, the adult pain studies typically use simple response scales with single-item measures of pain-a numeric rating scale, visual analog scale, or verbal rating scale. Across 42 review articles, consensus guidelines, expert opinion pieces, and primary research articles, the NRS response scale was most often recommended in these guidance documents. When reviewing the empirical basis for these recommendations, we found that the NRS had slightly superior measurement properties (e.g., reliability, validity, responsiveness) across a wide variety of contexts of use as compared to other response scales. CONCLUSIONS: Both empirical studies and review articles provide evidence that the 11-point NRS is likely the optimal response scale to evaluate pain among adult patients without cognitive impairment.

Economic Burden of Prescription Opioid Misuse and Abuse: A Systematic Review.

A 2009 systematic review found that the total cost of prescription opioid abuse in 2001 in the United States was approximately $8.6 billion and medical expenses were estimated to be $15,884 for opioid abusers and $1,830 for nonabusers. A search was conducted for English publications on the cost of prescription opioid abuse and misuse from 2009 to 2014. The initial literature search identified 5,412 citations. Title and abstract review selected 59 for further review. The final review process resulted in 16 publications for inclusion that examined cost from the payer perspective. Mean costs to the payer for abusers were $23,000-$25,000 per year and excess costs approximately $15,000 per patient. Three papers were identified that presented societal costs, including direct and indirect costs such as criminal justice costs and costs associated with lost productivity. The strongest evidence suggests that societal cost is in excess of $50 billion per year in the United States. Prescription opioid abuse and misuse is a common and important problem throughout the world that has significant associated societal costs and excess medical costs.

A review of the most common patient-reported outcomes in COPD--revisiting current knowledge and estimating future challenges.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures that quantify disease impact have become important measures of outcome in COPD research and treatment. The objective of this literature review was to comprehensively evaluate psychometric properties of available PRO instruments and the ability of each of them to characterize pharmaceutical treatment effects from published clinical trial evidence. Identified in this study were several PRO measures, both those that have been used extensively in COPD clinical trials (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire) and new instruments whose full value is still to be determined. This suggests a great need for more information about the patient experience of treatment benefit, but this also may pose challenges to researchers, clinicians, and other important stakeholders (eg, regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical companies) who develop new treatment entities and payers (including but not limited to health technology assessment agencies such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health). The purpose of this review is to enable researchers and clinicians to gain a broad overview of PRO measures in COPD by summarizing the value and purpose of these measures and by providing sufficient detail for interested audiences to determine which instrument may be the most suitable for evaluating a particular research purpose.

Psychometric properties of the Dependence Scale in large randomized clinical trials of patients with mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease.

OBJECTIVE: The need for assistance from others is a hallmark concern in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The psychometric properties of the Dependence Scale (DS) for measuring treatment benefit were investigated in large randomized clinical trials of patients with mild to moderate AD. METHODS: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the DS were examined. Path models appraised relationships and distinctiveness of key AD measures. The responder definition was empirically derived. RESULTS: Generally acceptable reliability (α ≥ .65), significant (P < .001) known-groups tests, and moderate to strong correlations (r ≥ .31) confirmed the DS psychometric properties. Path models supported relationships and distinctiveness of key AD measures. A DS change of ≤ 1 point for patients with limited home care and ≤ 2 points for patients with assisted living care best described stability of the level of dependence on caregivers. CONCLUSION: The DS is a psychometrically robust measure in mild to moderate AD. The empirically derived responder definition aids in the interpretation of DS change.

Patients' experience of asthma control and clinical guidelines: perspectives from a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines consider the concept of 'asthma control' as the primary goal of asthma treatment. This study aimed to explore patients' views of concepts that are important for understanding and evaluating asthma control. METHODS: Patients with mild to severe asthma in four countries completed the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and discussed their experiences in focus groups. Clinicians evaluated patients' levels of asthma control based on Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines. Clinician- and questionnaire-based ratings of asthma control were compared. Thematic analysis was used to identify key concepts from focus group transcripts. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 55 patients. Classification of asthma control, based on the ACQ, was consistent with clinician rating in 28 cases (51%). In focus groups, patients discussed concepts related to symptoms, asthma attacks (exacerbations), activity limitations, panic/fear, tiredness, sleep disturbances (nocturnal awakening and difficulty falling asleep), and rescue medication use when describing asthma control. Clinical guidelines also focus on symptoms, activity limitations, rescue medication use, and exacerbations but, in addition include lung function parameters. Guidelines do not take into account asthma-related panic/fear or tiredness and sleep disturbances beyond nocturnal awakening. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that patients' understanding of asthma control extends beyond the usual clinical manifestation of respiratory symptoms and lung function. This may have implications for clinical practice, for setting and achieving the goals of asthma control as well as for evaluation of treatments for asthma from the patients' perspective.

Assessing explanatory models for common mental disorders.

OBJECTIVES: This article addresses the clinical implications of 3 questions: (1) Can a simple checklist, suitable for use by practitioners, assess all components of explanatory models (EMs) for mental distress? (2) Are perceived causes of mental distress actually related to treatment preferences? (3) Are EMs influenced uniquely by ethnic group, or are they more closely associated with the presence of common mental disorders? METHOD: From February 2003 to January 2004, we investigated EMs for mental distress among 79 Bangladeshi, 85 black Caribbean, and 97 white British people who reported difficulties in the preceding month. EMs were assessed by a self-report checklist that inquired about the identity, causes, timeline, consequences, controllability, and preferred treatments for mental distress. Common mental disorders were assessed using the Clinical Interview Schedule (revised). RESULTS: Independent of ethnic group, people with common mental disorders were more likely to give spiritual causal explanations (odds ratio [OR] = 3.1, 95% CI = 1.9 to 4.9), to report behavioral (OR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.3 to 3.8) and financial consequences (OR = 3.3, 95% CI = 1.8 to 6), and to prefer complementary treatments (OR = 4.6, 95% CI = 2.3 to 9.1). Compared with black Caribbean and white British subjects, Bangladeshi subjects more often gave spiritual or physical causal explanations. Compared with white British subjects, Bangladeshi and black Caribbean subjects preferred medical and spiritual treatments, whereas white British subjects, as compared with the other 2 ethnic groups, preferred self-management and social treatments. Causal explanations did not always relate to the corresponding treatment preferences. CONCLUSIONS: EMs can be assessed by a simple checklist, show variations by ethnic group, and are associated with common mental disorders. Identifying EMs may strengthen the assessment of common mental disorders.