Lee Minji K, Abou Chaar Mohamad K, Blackmon Shanda H, Yost Kathleen J
Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Ave SW, 55902, Rochester, MN, USA.
Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2024 Mar 12;8(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s41687-024-00707-x.
The Upper Digestive Disease (UDD) Tool™ is used to monitor symptom frequency, intensity, and interference across nine symptom domains and includes two Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains assessing physical and mental health. This study aimed to establish cut scores for updated symptom domains through standard setting exercises and evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of virtual standard setting.
The extended Angoff method was employed to determine cut scores. Subject matter experts refined performance descriptions for symptom control categories and achieved consensus. Domains were categorized into good, moderate, and poor symptom control. Two cut scores were established, differentiating good vs. moderate and moderate vs. poor. Panelists estimated average scores for 100 borderline patients per item. Cut scores were computed based on the sum of the average ratings for individual questions, converted to 0-100 scale.
Performance descriptions were refined. Panelists discussed that interpretation of the scores should take into account the timing of symptoms after surgery and patient populations, and the importance of items asking symptom frequency, severity, and interference with daily life. The good/moderate cut scores ranged from 21.3 to 35.0 (mean 28.6, SD 3.6) across domains, and moderate/poor ranged from 47.5 to 71.3 (mean 54.5, SD 7.0).
Panelists were confident in the virtual standard setting process, expecting valid cut scores. Future studies can further validate the cut scores using patient perspectives and collect patient and physician preferences for displaying contextual items on patient- and physician-facing dashboard.
上消化道疾病(UDD)工具™用于监测九个症状领域的症状频率、强度和干扰情况,还包括两个患者报告结局测量信息系统(PROMIS)领域,用于评估身心健康。本研究旨在通过标准设定练习为更新后的症状领域确定临界值,并评估虚拟标准设定的有效性和可接受性。
采用扩展的安格夫方法确定临界值。主题专家完善了症状控制类别的表现描述并达成共识。将各领域分为症状控制良好、中等和较差三类。确定了两个临界值,以区分良好与中等以及中等与较差。小组成员估计了每个项目100名临界患者的平均得分。根据各个问题平均评分的总和计算临界值,并转换为0至100分的量表。
完善了表现描述。小组成员讨论认为,分数的解释应考虑手术后症状出现的时间和患者群体,以及询问症状频率、严重程度和对日常生活干扰的项目的重要性。各领域良好/中等临界值范围为21.3至35.0(平均28.6,标准差3.6),中等/较差临界值范围为47.5至71.3(平均54.5,标准差7.0)。
小组成员对虚拟标准设定过程充满信心,期望得到有效的临界值。未来的研究可以从患者角度进一步验证临界值,并收集患者和医生对于在面向患者和医生的仪表板上显示背景项目的偏好。