» Articles » PMID: 37121630

Updated Recommendations on Evidence Needed to Support Measurement Comparability Among Modes of Data Collection for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force

Overview
Journal Value Health
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2023 Apr 30
PMID 37121630
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The ISPOR Task Force on measurement comparability between modes of data collection for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has updated the good practice recommendations from the 2009 ISPOR electronic patient-reported outcome and 2014 patient-reported outcome mixed modes Good Research Practices Task Force reports in light of accumulated evidence of measurement comparability among different modes of PROM data collection. Furthermore, with the increasing use of electronic formats of clinical outcome assessments in clinical trials and the US Food and Drug Administration's encouragement of electronic data collection, this new task force report provides stakeholders with best practice recommendations reflecting the current body of evidence and enables them to respond to future developments in research and technology. This task force recommends an evidence-based approach to determine whether new research is needed to evaluate measurement comparability for a given questionnaire or technology. The suitability of existing evidence depends upon whether it satisfactorily demonstrates that the change in data collection mode has not affected the PROM's measurement properties. In cases where sufficient evidence of measurement comparability exists and best practices for faithful migration are followed, this task force concludes that further testing of measurement comparability among the data collection modes is unnecessary, including cases of "mixing modes" within clinical trials such as bring your own device designs.

Citing Articles

Best practices and pragmatic approaches for patient-reported outcomes and quality of life measures in cancer clinical trials.

Bandos H, Torres-Saavedra P, Culakova E, Gunn H, Lee M, Duan F J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2025; 2025(68):14-21.

PMID: 39989038 PMC: 11848031. DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgae047.


A head-to-head comparison of the adult EQ-5D-5L and youth EQ-5D-Y-5L in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis.

Bonsel J, Peeters C, Reijman M, Dings T, Rutges J, Kempen D J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2025; 9(1):13.

PMID: 39878911 PMC: 11780234. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-025-00842-z.


Measurement properties of the Traumatic Brain Injury Quality of Life (TBI-QoL) and Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life (SCI-QoL) measurement systems: a systematic review.

Ataman R, Alhasani R, Auneau-Enjalbert L, Quigley A, Michael H, Ahmed S Syst Rev. 2025; 14(1):18.

PMID: 39838501 PMC: 11749626. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02722-x.


Measurement Equivalence and Feasibility of the Electronic and Paper Versions of the POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Meirte J, Hellemans N, Daele U, Maertens K, Denteneer L, Anthonissen M Eur Burn J. 2024; 5(4):321-334.

PMID: 39727906 PMC: 11727002. DOI: 10.3390/ebj5040030.


Assessing usability of electronic patient-reported outcome measures in older people with and without a rare dermatologic disorder.

Ho C, Kundig A, Bahadori L, Roat K, Bruce R, Goswami C J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2024; 8(1):145.

PMID: 39692800 PMC: 11655768. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-024-00821-w.