Navigating the outcome maze: a scoping review of outcomes and instruments in clinical trials in genetic neurodevelopmental disorders and intellectual disability.

Background: Individuals with genetic neurodevelopmental disorders (GNDs) or intellectual disability (ID) are often affected by complex neuropsychiatric comorbidities. Targeted treatments are increasingly available, but due to the heterogeneity of these patient populations, choosing a key outcome and corresponding outcome measurement instrument remains challenging. Objectives: The aim of this scoping review was to describe the research on outcomes and instruments used in clinical trials in GNDs and ID. Eligibility criteria: Clinical trials in individuals with GNDs and ID for any intervention over the past 10 years were included in the review. Sources of evidence: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched. Titles and abstracts were independently screened for eligibility with a subsample of 10% double-screening for interrater reliability. Data from full texts were independently reviewed. Discrepancies were discussed until consensus was reached. Charting methods: Information was recorded on patient populations, interventions, designs, outcomes, measurement instruments, and type of reporter when applicable. Qualitative and descriptive analyses were performed. Results: We included 312 studies reporting 91 different outcomes, with cognitive function most frequently measured (28%). Various outcome measurement instruments (n = 457) were used, with 288 in only a single clinical trial. There were 18 genetic condition-specific instruments and 16 measures were designed ad-hoc for one particular trial. Types of report included proxy-report (39%), self-report (22%), clinician-report (16%), observer-report (6%), self-assisted report (1%), or unknown (16%). Conclusion: This scoping review of current practice reveals a myriad of outcomes and outcome measurement instruments for clinical trials in GNDs and ID. This complicates generalization, evidence synthesis, and evaluation. It underlines the need for consensus on suitability, validity, and relevancy of instruments, ultimately resulting in a core outcome set. A series of steps is proposed to move from the myriad of measures to a more unified approach.

Navigating the maze of outcome measures in rare disorders Treatments for genetic neurodevelopmental disorders and intellectual disability are increasingly available. However, it is hard to find appropriate instruments to measure whether these treatments are working. This hampers research and means some patients might not get the treatment they need. This scoping review provides an overview of investigated outcomes in this group, and with which instruments these are measured. It reveals that many different and overlapping outcomes are measured, complicating gathering, combining, and comparing of evidence. This scoping review underlines the need for harmonization and consensus on suitability, validity, and relevancy. Steps are proposed to move from the maze of outcome measures to a unified approach. Also, we provided recommendations for researchers to measure what matters to affected individuals and patient-centered care.

Identifying Relevant Concepts for the Development of a Communicative Participation Item Bank for Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review of Existing Instruments.

PURPOSE: This study aims to systematically identify items that measure communicative participation from measurement instruments that measure (aspects of) communication and/or participation in children and adolescents (5-18 years old) with communication disorders, for developing an item bank. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE and Embase to search for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) or parent reports measuring aspects of communication and/or participation in children and adolescents. The individual items of the included measurement instruments were reviewed on whether they measure communicative participation. The items were then classified into one of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) for Children and Youth (World Health Organization, 2007) domains of activities and participation. RESULTS: A total of 29 instruments were found, nine PROMs and 20 parent reports. One hundred forty-five items were identified that measure communicative participation. From these 145 items, 74 were retrieved from PROMs (51%), and 71 were retrieved from parent reports (49%). The majority of items were classified in ICF Domain 7, interpersonal interactions and relationships (73.8%), followed by Domain 8, major life areas (13.8%), and Domain 9, community, social, and civic life (8.3%). Only a few items were found in Domains 5 and 6, and none was found in Domains 1, 2, and 4. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 145 items potentially useful for developing an item bank addressing communicative participation in children and adolescents with communication disorders. However, item development in collaboration with the target population is needed to ensure that these items fully reflect the construct.

The psychometric properties of the PROMIS® profile CAT in people with stroke.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS) Profile Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) consists of seven CATs and one single item measuring most relevant aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of our study was to determine construct validity and floor and ceiling effects of the PROMIS Profile CAT in Dutch people with stroke. METHODS: People with stroke receiving rehabilitation completed the PROMIS Profile CAT and the EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ5D). Construct validity was evaluated with hypotheses testing based on expected correlations between the profile domains and the domains of the EQ5D. The proportion of participants with the lowest and highest scores were calculated for each profile domain to assess floor and ceiling effects. RESULTS: 160 participants were included (median age 61 years, 41.9% female). For the PROMIS Profile domains Physical Function, Anxiety, Depression, Sleep Disturbance, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity > 75% of the results met our hypotheses. For Fatigue and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities only 60% of hypotheses were met. No floor or ceiling effects were found, with the exception of a floor effect for Pain Intensity which probably indicates that many participants had no pain. CONCLUSION: Most domains of the PROMIS Profile CAT showed sufficient construct validity and no problematic floor or ceiling effects in people with stroke. These CATs and the single item Pain Intensity can be used to efficiently measure HRQoL in people with stroke.

What's in a score: A longitudinal investigation of scores based on item response theory and classical test theory for the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire in cognitively normal and impaired older adults.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether item response theory (IRT)-based scoring allows for a more accurate, responsive, and less biased assessment of everyday functioning than traditional classical test theory (CTT)-based scoring, as measured with the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire. METHOD: In this longitudinal multicenter study including cognitively normal and impaired individuals, we examined IRT-based and CTT-based score distributions and differences between diagnostic groups using linear regressions, and investigated scale attenuation. We compared change over time between scoring methods using linear mixed models with random intercepts and slopes for time. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred ninety-four participants were included (66.6 ± 7.7 years, 54% female): n = 2,032 (89%) with normal cognition, n = 93 (4%) with subjective cognitive decline, n = 79 (3%) with mild cognitive impairment, and n = 91 (4%) with dementia. At baseline, IRT-based and CTT-based scores were highly correlated (r = -0.92). IRT-based scores showed less scale attenuation than CTT-based scores. In a subsample of n = 1,145 (62%) who were followed for a mean of 1.3 (SD = 0.6) years, IRT-based scores declined significantly among cognitively normal individuals (unstandardized coefficient [B] = -0.15, 95% confidence interval, 95% CI [-0.28, -0.03], effect size = -0.02), whereas CTT-based scores did not (B = 0.20, 95% CI [-0.02, 0.41], effect size = 0.02). In the other diagnostic groups, effect sizes of change over time were similar. CONCLUSIONS: IRT-based scores were less affected by scale attenuation than CTT-based scores. With regard to responsiveness, IRT-based scores showed more signal than CTT-based scores in early disease stages, highlighting the IRT-based scores' superior suitability for use in preclinical populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Estimating anchor-based minimal important change using longitudinal confirmatory factor analysis.

PURPOSE: The minimal important change (MIC) is defined as the smallest within-individual change in a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that patients on average perceive as important. We describe a method to estimate this value based on longitudinal confirmatory factor analysis (LCFA). The method is evaluated and compared with a recently published method based on longitudinal item response theory (LIRT) in simulated and real data. We also examined the effect of sample size on bias and precision of the estimate. METHODS: We simulated 108 samples with various characteristics in which the true MIC was simulated as the mean of individual MICs, and estimated MICs based on LCFA and LIRT. Additionally, both MICs were estimated in existing PROMIS Pain Behavior data from 909 patients. In another set of 3888 simulated samples with sample sizes of 125, 250, 500, and 1000, we estimated LCFA-based MICs. RESULTS: The MIC was equally well recovered with the LCFA-method as using the LIRT-method, but the LCFA analyses were more than 50 times faster. In the Pain Behavior data (with higher scores indicating more pain behavior), an LCFA-based MIC for improvement was estimated to be 2.85 points (on a simple sum scale ranging 14-42), whereas the LIRT-based MIC was estimated to be 2.60. The sample size simulations showed that smaller sample sizes decreased the precision of the LCFA-based MIC and increased the risk of model non-convergence. CONCLUSION: The MIC can accurately be estimated using LCFA, but sample sizes need to be preferably greater than 125.

Common measures or common metrics? the value of IRT-based common metrics.

There is a clear need to harmonize outcome measurement. Some authors propose to express scores as T scores to facilitate interpretation of PROM results in clinical practice. While this is a step in the right direction, there are important limitations to the acceptance of the T score metric as a common metric when T scores are based on raw sum scores of ordinal items: Such T scores of different instruments are not exactly comparable because they are not interval scaled; T scores of different measures are only on the same scale if exactly the same reference group is used; and the T sore metric cannot be maintained because it is reference population-dependent and needs to be updated regularly. These limitations can be overcome by using an item response theory (IRT)-based metric. Items from different measures can be placed on the same IRT metric to make scores comparable on an interval scale. The PROMIS initiative used IRT to develop item banks for measuring various health outcomes. Other PROMs have been linked to the PROMIS metric. Although PROMIS uses a T-score metric for practical reasons, the underlying PROMIS metric is actually an IRT metric. An IRT approach also enables further development of an item bank while preserving the underlying metric. Therefore, IRT-based metrics should be considered as common metrics for the future.

Core outcome measurement instruments for use in clinical and research settings for adults with post-COVID-19 condition: an international Delphi consensus study.

Post-COVID-19 condition (also known as long COVID) is a new, complex, and poorly understood disorder. A core outcome set (COS) for post-COVID-19 condition in adults has been developed and agreement is now required on the most appropriate measurement instruments for these core outcomes. We conducted an international consensus study involving multidisciplinary experts and people with lived experience of long COVID. The study comprised a literature review to identify measurement instruments for the core outcomes, a three-round online modified Delphi process, and an online consensus meeting to generate a core outcome measurement set (COMS). 594 individuals from 58 countries participated. The number of potential instruments for the 12 core outcomes was reduced from 319 to 19. Consensus was reached for inclusion of the modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale for respiratory outcomes. Measures for two relevant outcomes from a previously published COS for acute COVID-19 were also included: time until death, for survival, and the Recovery Scale for COVID-19, for recovery. Instruments were suggested for consideration for the remaining nine core outcomes: fatigue or exhaustion, pain, post-exertion symptoms, work or occupational and study changes, and cardiovascular, nervous system, cognitive, mental health, and physical outcomes; however, consensus was not achieved for instruments for these outcomes. The recommended COMS and instruments for consideration provide a foundation for the evaluation of post-COVID-19 condition in adults, which should help to optimise clinical care and accelerate research worldwide. Further assessment of this COMS is warranted as new data emerge on existing and novel measurement instruments.

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the ICHOM standard set for stroke: the Dutch version.

INTRODUCTION: The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) developed a standard set of patient-centered outcome measures for use in stroke patients. In addition to the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Health, it is comprised of 25 questions that are not part of a specific questionnaire. This study aimed to translate these 25 single questions into Dutch. METHODS: Two native Dutch-speaking translators independently translated the original ICHOM questions into Dutch. A consensus translation was made by these translators and a third person. This translation was subsequently translated back to English independently by two native English-speaking translators. Afterwards a pre-final version was made by consensus of a committee. After field-testing among 30 stroke patients, a final version was made. RESULTS: The forward and backward translations led to eight cross-cultural adaptations. Based on the interviews with stroke patients, 12 questions were changed to enhance comprehensibility leading to a final Dutch translation of the 25 single questions. CONCLUSIONS: A Dutch translation of the 25 single questions of the ICHOM Standard Set for Stroke was developed. Now a complete ICHOM Standard Set for Stroke can be used in Dutch populations allowing comparison and improvement of stroke care.

Clinician-reported outcome measures for the assessment of vitiligo: A scoping review.

Clinician-reported outcome measures (ClinROMs) are essential for assessment of vitiligo in clinical trials and daily practice. Several instruments have been developed and tested to measure, for example, vitiligo extent, repigmentation and activity. The goal of this review was to identify all introductory publications of ClinROMs for vitiligo that include at least some aspects of validation and to describe the instruments' characteristics, intention for use and practical strengths and limitations. A search strategy was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to July 2022. Based on the literature search (n = 2860), 10 articles were identified, describing 14 different ClinROMs. Six ClinRoms measured disease extent and/or repigmentation, seven evaluated disease activity and one was a composite score. The Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (VASI), and Vitiligo Extent Score (VES and VESplus) measure overall disease extent and/or repigmentation. The VASI relies on hand units (1% body surface area), whereas the VES and VESplus use a picture-based scoring technique. The Vitiligo Extent Score for a Target Area (VESTA) measures repigmentation percentage for target lesions. One global assessment score for extent has been validated. Vitiligo disease activity scores included a static measure of clinical activity signs (Vitiligo Signs of Activity Score [VSAS]) and two measures assessing dynamic evolution (Vitiligo Disease Activity Score [VDAS] and Vitiligo Disease Improvement Score [VDIS]). The Vitiligo European Task Force assessment tool (VETFa) is a composite score. Depending on the practical strengths and limitations as well as the research question and setting (clinical trials vs. daily practice), the choice of an appropriate ClinROM may differ. Fourteen ClinROMs in vitiligo were identified to measure vitiligo extent, repigmentation, and activity. Further research evaluating the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of each instrument and worldwide consensus on which instrument to use for a specific outcome (domain) is greatly needed.

Further development in measuring communicative participation: identifying items to extend the applicability of the communicative participation item bank.

BACKGROUND: The ability to communicate is a prerequisite for participation in today's society. To measure participation in adults with communication disorders, the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) was developed in 2006. Since then, several new PROMs have been developed to measure communication and the impact of communication disorders on participation. Moreover, the CPIB items do not all appear to be relevant to certain populations with communication problems and context of communicative participation is changing rapidly, given the increased use of digital communication forms. The purpose of this study was to identify new PROMs developed since 2006 that aim to measure (aspects of) communication, in order to select items that are suitable for expanding the Communicative Participation Item Bank to make the item bank more widely applicable (e.g., to the hearing-impaired population) and tailored to the current societal context. METHODS: Medline and Embase were used to search for PROMs that aim to measure (aspects of) communication. Each new PROM as well as the CPIB, was evaluated to determine to what extent it contains items that measure communicative participation and to what extent these items capture all communicative participation domains by linking each item to the ICF Activities and Participation domains. RESULTS: This study identified 31 new PROMs, containing 391 items that were labelled as measuring communicative participation. The majority of the 391 items measure aspects of ICF Activities and Participation domain 'communication', followed by the domain 'interpersonal interactions and relationships'. The other ICF Activity and Participation domains were less often addressed. Analysis of the CPIB showed that items do not cover all domains of participation as defined in the ICF, such as the 'major life areas' domain. CONCLUSIONS: We found a potential pool of 391 items measuring communicative participation that could be considered for extending the CPIB. We found items in domains that are already present in the CPIB, but also items that relate to new domains, such as an item on talking with customers or clients for the 'major life areas' domain. Inclusion of new items in other domains would benefit the comprehensiveness of the item bank.

Patient-reported outcomes for people with diabetes: what and how to measure? A narrative review.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.

Suitability of the animated activity questionnaire for use as computer adaptive test: establishing the AAQ-CAT.

PURPOSE: The animated activity questionnaire (AAQ) is a computer-based measure of activity limitations. To answer a question, patients choose the animation of a person performing an activity that matches their own level of limitation. The AAQ has not yet been tested for suitability to be applied as computer-adaptive test (CAT). Thus, the objective of this study was to develop and evaluate an AAQ-based CAT to facilitate the application of the AAQ in daily clinical care. METHODS: Patients (n = 1408) with hip/knee osteoarthritis from Brazil, Denmark, France, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and the UK responded to all 17 AAQ items. Assumptions of item-response theory (IRT) modelling were investigated. To establish item parameters for the CAT, a graded response model was estimated. To evaluate the performance of post-hoc simulated AAQ-based CATs, precision, test length, and construct validity (correlations with well-established measures of activity limitations) were evaluated. RESULTS: Unidimensionality (CFI = 0.95), measurement invariance (R2-change < 2%), and IRT item fit (S-X2 p > .003) of the AAQ were supported. Performing simulated CATs, the mean test length was more than halved (≤ 8 items), while the range of precise measurement (standard error ≤ 0.3) was comparable to the full AAQ. The correlations between original AAQ scores and three AAQ-CAT versions were ≥ 0.95. Correlations of AAQ-CAT scores with patient-reported and performance measures of activity limitations were ≥ 0.60. CONCLUSION: The almost non-verbal AAQ-CAT is an innovative and efficient tool in patients with hip/knee osteoarthritis from various countries, measuring activity limitations with lower respondent burden, but similar precision and construct validity compared to the full AAQ.

Responsiveness and minimal important change of seven PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) has the potential to harmonize the measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) across medical conditions. We evaluated responsiveness and minimal important change (MIC) of seven Dutch-Flemish PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) in Dutch patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: CKD patients (eGFR < 30 ml/min.1.73m2) completed at baseline and after 6 months seven PROMIS CATs (assessing physical function, pain interference, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, and ability to participate in social roles and activities), Short Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12), PROMIS Pain Intensity single item, Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI), and Global Rating Scales (GRS) of change. Responsiveness was assessed by testing predefined hypotheses about expected correlations among measures, area under the ROC Curve, and effect sizes. MIC was determined with predictive modelling. RESULTS: 207 patients were included; 186 (90%) completed the follow-up. Most results were in accordance with expectations (70-91% of hypotheses confirmed), with some exceptions for PROMIS Anxiety and Ability to Participate (60% and 42% of hypotheses confirmed, respectively). For PROMIS Anxiety and Depression correlations with the GRS were too low (0.04 and 0.20, respectively) to calculate a MIC. MIC values, representing minimal important deterioration, ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 T-score points for the other domains. CONCLUSION: We found sufficient responsiveness of PROMIS CATs Physical Function, Fatigue, Sleep Disturbance, and Depression. The results for PROMIS CATs Pain Interference were almost sufficient, but some results for Anxiety and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities were not as expected. Reported MIC values should be interpreted with caution because most patients did not change.

An extension minimal important difference credibility item addressing construct proximity is a reliable alternative to the correlation item.

OBJECTIVES: Minimal important difference (MID), the smallest change or difference that patients perceive as important, aids interpretation of change in patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores. A credibility instrument that assesses the methodological rigor of an anchor-based MID includes one core item addressing the correlation between the PROM and the anchor. However, the majority of MID studies in the literature fail to report the correlation. To address this issue, we extended the anchor-based MID credibility instrument by adding an item addressing construct proximity as an alternative to the correlation item. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Informed by an MID methodological survey, we added an alternative item-a subjective assessment of similarity of the constructs (i.e., construct proximity) between PROM and anchor-to the correlation item and generated principles for the assessment. We sampled 101 MIDs and analyzed the assessments performed by each pair of raters. By calculating weighted Cohen's kappa, we assessed the reliability of the assessments. RESULTS: Construct proximity assessment is based on the anticipated association between the anchor and PROM constructs: the closer the anticipated association, the higher the rating. Our detailed principles address the most frequently used anchors: transition ratings, measures of satisfaction, other PROMs, and clinical measures. The assessments showed acceptable agreement (weighted kappa 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.94) between raters. CONCLUSION: In the absence of a reported correlation coefficient, construct proximity assessment provides a useful alternative in the credibility assessment of anchor-based MID estimates.

Everyday Barriers in Communicative Participation According to People With Communication Problems.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to gain a comprehensive understanding of participation situations that are challenging for people with communication problems, to provide input for the further development of potential items for the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB). METHOD: A purposive sampling strategy was used to include a diverse group of people with communication problems. Diaries were used as a sensitizing exercise for inductive in-depth interviews. In these interviews, elements of communicative participation situations (concepts) were elicited that participants themselves experienced as difficult because of their communication problem. A thematic content analysis was used to identify overarching themes. In addition, new items were formulated based on the raw codes of the transcripts and linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Activity and Participation domains to examine the distribution of items across the breadth of the construct of communicative participation. RESULTS: Eighteen interviews yielded 44 different concepts. They were clustered in six themes, which capture the person, location, topic, mode, moment, and pace of communication. In total, 103 new items measuring communicative participation were formulated. Most of these items relate to International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Activity and Participation domains "interpersonal interactions and relationships," "major life areas," and "community, social, and civic life." CONCLUSIONS: This study resulted in an overview of self-reported barriers in daily communicative participation experienced by people with communication problems. These communicative participation situations can be captured within 44 concepts, which are covered by six themes. Future work should investigate if the newly written items can be added to the CPIB. The concepts and the themes can be used in designing and delivering a participation-focused intervention for this population.

Estimating meaningful thresholds for multi-item questionnaires using item response theory.

PURPOSE: Meaningful thresholds are needed to interpret patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) results. This paper introduces a new method, based on item response theory (IRT), to estimate such thresholds. The performance of the method is examined in simulated datasets and two real datasets, and compared with other methods. METHODS: The IRT method involves fitting an IRT model to the PROM items and an anchor item indicating the criterion state of interest. The difficulty parameter of the anchor item represents the meaningful threshold on the latent trait. The latent threshold is then linked to the corresponding expected PROM score. We simulated 4500 item response datasets to a 10-item PROM, and an anchor item. The datasets varied with respect to the mean and standard deviation of the latent trait, and the reliability of the anchor item. The real datasets consisted of a depression scale with a clinical depression diagnosis as anchor variable and a pain scale with a patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) question as anchor variable. RESULTS: The new IRT method recovered the true thresholds accurately across the simulated datasets. The other methods, except one, produced biased threshold estimates if the state prevalence was smaller or greater than 0.5. The adjusted predictive modeling method matched the new IRT method (also in the real datasets) but showed some residual bias if the prevalence was smaller than 0.3 or greater than 0.7. CONCLUSIONS: The new IRT method perfectly recovers meaningful (interpretational) thresholds for multi-item questionnaires, provided that the data satisfy the assumptions for IRT analysis.

Development of a standard set of PROs and generic PROMs for Dutch medical specialist care : Recommendations from the Outcome-Based Healthcare Program Working Group Generic PROMs.

PURPOSE: The added value of measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for delivering patient-centered care and assessment of healthcare quality is increasingly evident. However, healthcare system wide data collection initiatives are hampered by the proliferation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and conflicting data collection standards. As part of a national initiative of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport we developed a consensus-based standard set of generic PROs and PROMs to be implemented across Dutch medical specialist care. METHODS: A working group of mandated representatives of umbrella organizations involved in Dutch medical specialist care, together with PROM experts and patient organizations worked through a structured, consensus-driven co-creation process. This included literature reviews, online expert and working group meetings, and feedback from national patient- and umbrella organizations. The 'PROM-cycle' methodology was used to select feasible, valid, and reliable PROMs to obtain domain scores for each of the PROs included in the set. RESULTS: Eight PROs across different domains of health were ultimately endorsed: symptoms (pain & fatigue), functioning (physical, social/participation, mental [anxiety & depression]), and overarching (quality of life & perceived overall health). A limited number of generic PROMs was endorsed. PROMIS short forms were selected as the preferred instruments for all PROs. Several recommendations were formulated to facilitate healthcare system level adoption and implementation of the standard set. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a consensus-based standard set of Generic PROMs and a set of recommendations to facilitate healthcare system wide implementation across Dutch medical specialist care.