» Articles » PMID: 19257798

Optimal Recall Periods for Patient-reported Outcomes: Challenges and Potential Solutions

Overview
Publisher Informa Healthcare
Date 2009 Mar 5
PMID 19257798
Citations 187
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: As the role and importance of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) increase, the validity and reliability of PRO measures come under greater scientific and regulatory scrutiny. One key issue is selecting the 'most appropriate' recall period for capturing PROs in clinical trials. This paper draws on survey research, health-specific literature, and results from clinical trials to summarize factors that can influence recall and provide guidance on selecting an optimal recall period.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review of six databases and additional literature drawn from bibliographies of the selected articles.

Results: Six major factors can influence recall; these can be classified into two broad areas: characteristics of the recalled phenomenon (recency, attributes, complexity) and context or meaning of the recalled phenomenon (salience, patient experience, mood). Results of different recall periods for three classes of PROs are presented: health behaviors, symptoms, and health-related quality of life. We present findings on the effect of alternative recall periods for three commonly used PROs. Finally, we propose a heuristic model to link the concept under investigation with an optimal recall period.

Conclusions: No single recall period is best for all measures or all phenomena. The recall period must correspond to the characteristics of the phenomenon of interest and the purpose of the assessment. Recall period is an issue of internal validity. An incorrect recall period introduces measurement error that may reduce the chances of detecting a treatment effect. Researchers should consider recall period as seriously as they do other measurement properties.

Citing Articles

Surgical patient-reported experience measures and qualitative experience studies: systematic review.

Darwish M, Nandy S, Willis S, Coulson J, Withers K, Bosanquet D BJS Open. 2025; 9(1).

PMID: 39931892 PMC: 11811639. DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae142.


Reliability of the Second and Third Iterations of the Sensory-Motor Dysfunction Questionnaire in a Subclinical Neck Pain Population.

Ambalavanar U, Haavik H, Kumari N, Amjad I, Rotondi N, Murphy B Brain Sci. 2025; 15(1).

PMID: 39851434 PMC: 11763920. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci15010067.


The Chinese version of the immediate mood scaler (IMS): a study evaluating its validity, reliability, and responsiveness in patients with MDD in China.

Chen X, Feng Z, Li N, Xiao L, Chen X, Zhu X BMC Psychiatry. 2025; 25(1):20.

PMID: 39773183 PMC: 11708086. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-024-06418-3.


Recalling what we thought we knew about recall periods: a qualitative descriptive study of how adults diagnosed with cancer use recall periods for patient-reported outcome items about physical function.

Coles T, Plyler K, Hernandez A, Fillipo R, Henke D, Arizmendi C Qual Life Res. 2024; .

PMID: 39630392 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-024-03847-1.


Letter to the editor: social influences on the relationship between dissociation and psychotic-like experience.

Toyoshima H, Akase T Psychol Med. 2024; :1-2.

PMID: 39582395 PMC: 11650153. DOI: 10.1017/S0033291724002277.