IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v13y2020i2d10.1007_s40271-019-00404-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development and Content Validity Testing of Patient-Reported Outcome Items for Children to Self-Assess Symptoms of the Common Cold

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia Halstead

    (McNeil Consumer Healthcare, a Division of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.)

  • Rob Arbuckle

    (Adelphi Values)

  • Chris Marshall

    (Adelphi Values)

  • Brenda Zimmerman

    (McNeil Consumer Healthcare, a Division of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.)

  • Kate Bolton

    (Adelphi Values)

  • Cathy Gelotte

    (McNeil Consumer Healthcare, a Division of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.)

Abstract

Background and objective No pediatric patient-reported outcome instruments specific to the common cold are found in the literature. This study involved development and content validity testing of patient-reported outcome items (questions and response options) assessing cold symptoms in children aged 6–11 years. Methods Draft patient-reported outcome instructions, items, response scales, and recall periods were developed based on the literature and existing measures. Qualitative interviews were conducted with children (n = 39) who were currently (n = 31) or had recently (n = 8) experienced a cold and ten parents of a subset of children aged 6–8 years. The interviews were conducted over two rounds and included open-ended concept elicitation questioning, a free-drawing task, a card sorting task, and a task involving circling parts of the body, followed by cognitive debriefing of draft items. Thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts was performed to analyze the qualitative data. The findings were used to support revisions to the draft patient-reported outcome. Results Ten symptom concepts were reported by the children during concept elicitation. The creative tasks helped the children to describe their symptoms, generally using consistent language to do so, irrespective of age. Nineteen patient-reported outcome items were developed and subject to cognitive debriefing. Debriefing with both children and parents informed several small revisions and provided evidence that the majority of children found most patient-reported outcome items easy to understand, and that the items were mainly interpreted consistently and as intended. Conclusions This in-depth qualitative study has supported identification of relevant symptom concepts and the development and refinement of patient-reported outcome items to assess those concepts. The findings support the content validity of the items and suggest that they can be used with confidence in children aged 9 years and older. For children aged 6–8 years, it is recommended the items are administered with initial adult supervision to explain the more difficult concepts or through parent/interviewer administration.

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia Halstead & Rob Arbuckle & Chris Marshall & Brenda Zimmerman & Kate Bolton & Cathy Gelotte, 2020. "Development and Content Validity Testing of Patient-Reported Outcome Items for Children to Self-Assess Symptoms of the Common Cold," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(2), pages 235-250, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:13:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-019-00404-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00404-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-019-00404-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-019-00404-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:13:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-019-00404-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.