Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Refining scores based on patient reported outcomes – statistical and medical perspectives

Authors: Manuel Feißt, André Hennigs, Jörg Heil, Helfried Moosbrugger, Augustin Kelava, Ilona Stolpner, Meinhard Kieser, Geraldine Rauch

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) are gaining more and more importance in the context of clinical trials. The assessment of PRO is frequently performed by questionnaires where the multiple items of a questionnaire are usually pooled within summarizing scores. These scores are used as variables to measure subjective aspects of treatments and diseases. In clinical research, the calculation of these scores is mostly kept very simple, e.g. by a simple summation of item values. In the medical literature, there is hardly any guidance for performing a refinements of questionnaires and for deducing adequate scores. In contrast, in psychometric literature, there are plenty of more sophisticated methods, which overcome typical assumptions made in traditional (sum) scores, however to the prize of more complicated algorithms, which might be difficult to communicate. When faced with the practical task to refine an existing questionnaire, there exist a clear gap of guidance for applied medical researchers. By this article we try to fill this important gap between psychometric theory and medical application by illustrating our methodological choices on the example of a clinical PRO questionnaire.

Methods

Based on our experiences with the refinement of the BCTOS, a PRO questionnaire to assess aesthetic and function after breast conserving therapy in breast cancer patients, we present the following general steps that we performed by refining the BCTOS questionnaire and its scores: 1. Refinement of the length of the questionnaire and the (item-factor) structure. 2. Selection of the factor score estimation method. 3. Validation of the refined questionnaire and scores with respect to validity, reliability and structure based on a validation cohort.

Results

Our step-step-step procedure helped us to shorten the current form of the BCTOS and to redefine the factor structure. By this, the compliance of patients can be increased and the interpretation of the results becomes more coherent.

Conclusions

We present a step-by-step procedure to refine an existing medical questionnaire along with its scores illustrated and discussed by the refinement of the BCTOS.

Trial registration

Due to the character of the study (no intervention study), no registration was performed.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rotenstein LS, Huckman RS, Wagle NW. Making patients and doctors happier—the potential of patient-reported outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(14):1309–12.CrossRef Rotenstein LS, Huckman RS, Wagle NW. Making patients and doctors happier—the potential of patient-reported outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(14):1309–12.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Rombach I, Gray AM, Jenkinson C, Murray DW, Rivero-Arias O. Multiple imputation for patient reported outcome measures in randomised controlled trials: advantages and disadvantages of imputing at the item, subscale or composite score level. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):87.CrossRef Rombach I, Gray AM, Jenkinson C, Murray DW, Rivero-Arias O. Multiple imputation for patient reported outcome measures in randomised controlled trials: advantages and disadvantages of imputing at the item, subscale or composite score level. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):87.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Irwing P, Booth T, Hughes DJ. The Wiley handbook of psychometric testing: a multidisciplinary reference on survey, Scale and Test Development: John Wiley & Sons; 2018. Irwing P, Booth T, Hughes DJ. The Wiley handbook of psychometric testing: a multidisciplinary reference on survey, Scale and Test Development: John Wiley & Sons; 2018.
4.
go back to reference Stanton AL, Krishnan L, Collins CA. Form or function? Part 1. Subjective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer. 2001;91(12):2273–81.CrossRef Stanton AL, Krishnan L, Collins CA. Form or function? Part 1. Subjective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer. 2001;91(12):2273–81.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hennigs A, Heil J, Wagner A, Rath M, Moosbrugger H, Kelava A, et al. Development and psychometric validation of a shorter version of the breast cancer treatment outcome scale (BCTOS-12). Breast. 2018;38:58–65.CrossRef Hennigs A, Heil J, Wagner A, Rath M, Moosbrugger H, Kelava A, et al. Development and psychometric validation of a shorter version of the breast cancer treatment outcome scale (BCTOS-12). Breast. 2018;38:58–65.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Ahmed RL, Prizment A, Lazovich D, Schmitz KH, Folsom AR. Lymphedema and quality of life in breast cancer survivors: the Iowa Women’s health study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(35):5689.CrossRef Ahmed RL, Prizment A, Lazovich D, Schmitz KH, Folsom AR. Lymphedema and quality of life in breast cancer survivors: the Iowa Women’s health study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(35):5689.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Engel J, Kerr J, Schlesinger-Raab A, Sauer H, Hölzel D. Quality of life following breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy: results of a 5-year prospective study. Breast J. 2004;10(3):223–31.CrossRef Engel J, Kerr J, Schlesinger-Raab A, Sauer H, Hölzel D. Quality of life following breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy: results of a 5-year prospective study. Breast J. 2004;10(3):223–31.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Krishnan L, Stanton AL, Collins CA, Liston VE, Jewell WR. Form or function? Part 2. Objective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer. 2001;91(12):2282–7.CrossRef Krishnan L, Stanton AL, Collins CA, Liston VE, Jewell WR. Form or function? Part 2. Objective cosmetic and functional correlates of quality of life in women treated with breast-conserving surgical procedures and radiotherapy. Cancer. 2001;91(12):2282–7.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Giuliano AE, Ballman K, McCall L, Beitsch P, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz P, et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the American College of Surgeons oncology group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):413–20.CrossRef Giuliano AE, Ballman K, McCall L, Beitsch P, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz P, et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the American College of Surgeons oncology group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):413–20.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Revelle WR. psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. 2017. Revelle WR. psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. 2017.
12.
go back to reference Rosseel Y. Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). J Stat Softw. 2012;48(2):1–36.CrossRef Rosseel Y. Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). J Stat Softw. 2012;48(2):1–36.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kelley K. Methods for the behavioral, educational, and social sciences: an R package. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(4):979–84.CrossRef Kelley K. Methods for the behavioral, educational, and social sciences: an R package. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(4):979–84.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Holgado-Tello FP, Chacon-Moscoso S, Barbero-Garcia I, Vila-Abad E. Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Qual Quant. 2010;44(1):153–66.CrossRef Holgado-Tello FP, Chacon-Moscoso S, Barbero-Garcia I, Vila-Abad E. Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Qual Quant. 2010;44(1):153–66.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods. 1999;4(3):272.CrossRef Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods. 1999;4(3):272.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Moosbrugger H, Kelava A. Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion: Springer; 2007. Moosbrugger H, Kelava A. Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion: Springer; 2007.
17.
go back to reference Davidson R, MacKinnon JG. Bootstrap tests: how many bootstraps? Econ Rev. 2000;19(1):55–68.CrossRef Davidson R, MacKinnon JG. Bootstrap tests: how many bootstraps? Econ Rev. 2000;19(1):55–68.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Schumacher M, Olschewski M, Schulgen G. Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials. Stat Med. 1991;10(12):1915–30.CrossRef Schumacher M, Olschewski M, Schulgen G. Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials. Stat Med. 1991;10(12):1915–30.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Uluman M, Doğan C. Comparison of factor score computation methods in factor analysis. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2016;10(18):143–51. Uluman M, Doğan C. Comparison of factor score computation methods in factor analysis. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2016;10(18):143–51.
20.
go back to reference Donner A, Eliasziw M. Sample size requirements for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1987;6(4):441–8.CrossRef Donner A, Eliasziw M. Sample size requirements for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1987;6(4):441–8.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Sprangers M, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, Franklin J, te Velde A, Muller M, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(10):2756–68.CrossRef Sprangers M, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, Franklin J, te Velde A, Muller M, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(10):2756–68.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. JNCI. 1993;85(5):365–76.CrossRef Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. JNCI. 1993;85(5):365–76.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kamata A, Turhan A, Darandari E. Estimating reliability for multidimensional composite scale scores. Chicago, IL: Annual meeting of American Educational Research Association; 2003. Kamata A, Turhan A, Darandari E. Estimating reliability for multidimensional composite scale scores. Chicago, IL: Annual meeting of American Educational Research Association; 2003.
24.
go back to reference Moosbrugger H, Schermelleh-Engel K. Exploratorische (EFA) und Konfirmatorische Faktorenanalyse (CFA). Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion: Springer; 2012. p. 325–343. Moosbrugger H, Schermelleh-Engel K. Exploratorische (EFA) und Konfirmatorische Faktorenanalyse (CFA). Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion: Springer; 2012. p. 325–343.
25.
go back to reference Vaughan PW. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: effects of model misspecification and indicator nonnormality on two weighted least squares estimators. 2009. Vaughan PW. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: effects of model misspecification and indicator nonnormality on two weighted least squares estimators. 2009.
26.
go back to reference Li C-H. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behav Res Methods. 2016;48(3):936–49.CrossRef Li C-H. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behav Res Methods. 2016;48(3):936–49.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Mueller RO. Basic principles of structural equation modeling : an introduction to LISREL and EQS. New York: Springer; 1996. xxviii, 229 p. p. Mueller RO. Basic principles of structural equation modeling : an introduction to LISREL and EQS. New York: Springer; 1996. xxviii, 229 p. p.
28.
go back to reference Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Cangur S, Ercan I. Comparison of model fit indices used in structural equation modeling under multivariate normality. J Mod Appl Stat Methods. 2015;14(1):14.CrossRef Cangur S, Ercan I. Comparison of model fit indices used in structural equation modeling under multivariate normality. J Mod Appl Stat Methods. 2015;14(1):14.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol Res Online. 2003;8(2):23–74. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol Res Online. 2003;8(2):23–74.
31.
go back to reference Marsh HW, Hocevar D. Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychol Bull. 1985;97(3):562.CrossRef Marsh HW, Hocevar D. Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychol Bull. 1985;97(3):562.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Rindskopf D, Rose T. Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivar Behav Res. 1988;23(1):51–67.CrossRef Rindskopf D, Rose T. Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivar Behav Res. 1988;23(1):51–67.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Kline P. An easy guide to factor analysis: Routledge; 2014. Kline P. An easy guide to factor analysis: Routledge; 2014.
34.
go back to reference Dunn TJ, Baguley T, Brunsden V. From alpha to omega: a practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. Br J Psychol. 2014;105(3):399–412.CrossRef Dunn TJ, Baguley T, Brunsden V. From alpha to omega: a practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. Br J Psychol. 2014;105(3):399–412.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Refining scores based on patient reported outcomes – statistical and medical perspectives
Authors
Manuel Feißt
André Hennigs
Jörg Heil
Helfried Moosbrugger
Augustin Kelava
Ilona Stolpner
Meinhard Kieser
Geraldine Rauch
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0806-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019 Go to the issue