Abstract
AbstractPatient-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.
Graphical Abstract
Funder
European Federations for the Study of Diabetes
Diabetes Foundation Netherlands
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine
Reference171 articles.
1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) (2009) Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/patient-reported-outcome-measures-use-medical-product-development-support-labeling-claims
2. Greenhalgh J (2009) The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? Qual Life Res 18(1):115–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9430-6
3. Engelen V, Detmar S, Koopman H et al (2012) Reporting health-related quality of life scores to physicians during routine follow-up visits of pediatric oncology patients: is it effective? Pediatr Blood Cancer 58(5):766–774. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.23158
4. Harman NL, Wilding JPH, Curry D et al (2019) Selecting core outcomes for randomised effectiveness trials in type 2 diabetes (SCORE-IT): a patient and healthcare professional consensus on a core outcome set for type 2 diabetes. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 7(1):e000700. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-000700
5. ICHOM (2019) Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Adults. DATA COLLECTION REFERENCE GUIDE. Available from https://connect.ichom.org/patient-centered-outcome-measures/diabetes/ Accessed 30 Mar 2023
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献