Quality and acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures used in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME): a systematic review.

Purpose: To review the quality and acceptability of condition-specific, domain-specific and generic multi-item patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in the assessment of adults with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME).Methods: Systematic literature searches were made...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Quality of Life Research Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 35 - 53
Autores principales: Haywood KL, Staniszewska S, Chapman S, Haywood, Kirstie L, Staniszewska, Sophie, Chapman, Sarah
Formato: research systematic review Journal Article
Publicado: Springer Nature Feb2012
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=104625075&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 104625075
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09629343
        GPQ
      jtl: Quality of Life Research
      issn: 09629343
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Feb2012
      vid: 21
      iid: 1
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        104625075
        NLM21590511
        2011424180
        10.1007/s11136-011-9921-8
        NLM21590511
        104625075
      ppf: 35
      ppct: 18
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Quality and acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures used in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME): a systematic review.
      aug:
        au:
          Haywood KL
          Staniszewska S
          Chapman S
          Haywood, Kirstie L
          Staniszewska, Sophie
          Chapman, Sarah
        affil: Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
      sug:
        subj:
          Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic Psychosocial Factors
          Outcome Assessment
          Patients Psychosocial Factors
          Self Report Standards
          Adolescence
          Adult
          Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic Physiopathology
          Female
          Health Status
          Human
          Male
          Middle Age
          Young Adult
          Adolescent: 13-18 years
          Adult: 19-44 years
          Middle Aged: 45-64 years
          Female
          Male
      ab: Purpose: To review the quality and acceptability of condition-specific, domain-specific and generic multi-item patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in the assessment of adults with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME).Methods: Systematic literature searches were made to identify PROMs. Quality and acceptability was assessed against an appraisal framework, which captured evidence of both the thoroughness and results of evaluations: evidence of measurement (reliability, validity, responsiveness, interpretability, data quality/precision) and practical properties (feasibility, patient acceptability), and the extent of active patient involvement was sought.Results: A total of 11 CFS/ME-specific, 55 domain-specific and 11 generic measures were reviewed. With the exception of the generic SF-36, all measures had mostly limited evidence of measurement and/or practical properties. Patient involvement was poorly reported and often cursory.Conclusions: The quality and acceptability of reviewed PROMs is limited, and recommendations for patient-reported assessment are difficult. Significant methodological and quality issues in PROM development/evaluation were identified by the appraisal framework, which must be addressed in future research. Clear discrepancies exist between what is measured in research and how patients define their experience of CFS/ME. Future PROM development/evaluation must seek to involve patients more collaboratively to measure outcomes of importance using relevant and credible methods of assessment.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        systematic review
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N