Updating the omeract filter: Implications for patient-reported outcomes

John R. Kirwan*, Susan J. Bartlett, Dorcas E. Beaton, Boers Boers, Ailsa Bosworth, Peter M. Brooks, Ernest Choy, Maarten De Wit, Francis Guillemin, Sarah Hewlett, Tore K. Kvien, Robert B. Landewé, Amye L. Leong, Anne Lyddiatt, Lyn March, James May, Pamela Lesley Montie, Enkeleida Nikaï, Pam Richards, Marieke M J H VoshaarWilma Smeets, Vibeke Strand, Peter Tugwell, Laure Gossec

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

45 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: At a previous Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) meeting, participants reflected on the underlying methods of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument development. The participants requested proposals for more explicit instrument development protocols that would contribute to an enhanced version of the " Truth" statement in the OMERACT Filter, a widely used guide for outcome validation. In the present OMERACT session, we explored to what extent thesenew Filter 2.0 proposals were practicable, feasible, and already being applied. Methods: Following overview presentations, discussion groups critically reviewed the extent to which case studies of current OMERACT Working Groups complied with or negated the proposed PRO development framework, whether these observations had a more general application, and what issues remained to be resolved. Results: Several aspects of PRO development were recognized as particularly important, and the need to directly involve patients at every stage of an iterative PRO development program was endorsed. This included recognition that patients contribute as partners in the research and not merely as subjects. Correct communication of concepts with the words used in questionnaires was central to their performance as measuring instruments, and ensuring this understanding crossed cultural and linguistic boundaries was important in international studies or comparisons. Conclusion: Participants recognized, endorsed, and were generally already putting into practice the principles of PRO development presented in the plenary session. Further work is needed on some existing instruments and on establishing widespread good practice for working in close collaboration with patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1011-1015
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Rheumatology
Volume41
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2014

Keywords

  • Outcome and process assessment
  • Patient-reported outcomes
  • Randomized controlled trials

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Updating the omeract filter: Implications for patient-reported outcomes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this