Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility

Victor Brun Boesen; Stine Birk Nissen; Mogens Groenvold; Jakob Bue Bjorner; Laszlo Hegedüs; Steen Joop Bonnema; Åse Krogh Rasmussen; Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen; Torquil Watt

doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility

Victor Brun Boesen, Stine Birk Nissen, Mogens Groenvold, Jakob Bue Bjorner, Laszlo Hegedüs, Steen Joop Bonnema, Åse Krogh Rasmussen, Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen, Torquil Watt^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item’s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.

Original language	English
Journal	Quality of Life Research
Volume	27
Issue number	4
Pages (from-to)	1065–1076
Number of pages	12
ISSN	0962-9343
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7
Publication status	Published - 1 Apr 2018

Keywords

Cognitive interviewing
Ecological momentary assessments
Patient-reported outcomes
Quality-of-life measurement
Thyroid diseases

Access to Document

10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

Cite this

Boesen, V. B., Nissen, S. B., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Hegedüs, L., Bonnema, S. J., Rasmussen, Å. K., Feldt-Rasmussen, U., & Watt, T. (2018). Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility. Quality of Life Research, 27(4), 1065–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility. / Boesen, Victor Brun; Nissen, Stine Birk; Groenvold, Mogens et al.
In: Quality of Life Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, 01.04.2018, p. 1065–1076.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Boesen, VB, Nissen, SB, Groenvold, M , Bjorner, JB, Hegedüs, L, Bonnema, SJ, Rasmussen, ÅK, Feldt-Rasmussen, U & Watt, T 2018, 'Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility', Quality of Life Research, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1065–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

@article{43de9d87f1db4ae8a944c31671ab18f9,

title = "Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility",

abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item{\textquoteright}s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.",

keywords = "Cognitive interviewing, Ecological momentary assessments, Patient-reported outcomes, Quality-of-life measurement, Thyroid diseases",

author = "Boesen, {Victor Brun} and Nissen, {Stine Birk} and Mogens Groenvold and Bjorner, {Jakob Bue} and Laszlo Heged{\"u}s and Bonnema, {Steen Joop} and Rasmussen, {{\AA}se Krogh} and Ulla Feldt-Rasmussen and Torquil Watt",

year = "2018",

month = apr,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7",

language = "English",

volume = "27",

pages = "1065–1076",

journal = "Quality of Life Research",

issn = "0962-9343",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions

T2 - cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility

AU - Boesen, Victor Brun

AU - Nissen, Stine Birk

AU - Groenvold, Mogens

AU - Bjorner, Jakob Bue

AU - Hegedüs, Laszlo

AU - Bonnema, Steen Joop

AU - Rasmussen, Åse Krogh

AU - Feldt-Rasmussen, Ulla

AU - Watt, Torquil

PY - 2018/4/1

Y1 - 2018/4/1

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item’s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to adapt different domains of an existing retrospective questionnaire to momentary versions, to use and assess cognitive interviewing for evaluating the new versions, and to compare momentary compatibility (i.e. an item’s potential to be validly converted to a momentary version) across different scales. Methods: Initial momentary versions of retrospective patient-reported outcomes were produced by converting present perfect tense wording to present tense wording. Cognitive interviews were conducted iteratively with 21 patients to determine which reference period they actually employed, and to identify problems with new, revised versions. A think-aloud interview protocol was supplemented with non-specific concurrent and specific retrospective probing. The momentary compatibility of each item was evaluated by calculating the proportion of interviews wherein momentary reference periods were identified; problems were categorized according to cognitive aspects of survey methodology taxonomy. The efficiency of various cognitive interviewing techniques was determined by evaluating whether applied reference periods were identified by think-aloud alone or by supplementary probes. Results: The momentary compatibility varied from 5 to 100% across items. Cognitive interviews revealed potential problems of various severities in the majority of items. Think-aloud alone was sufficient at determining the applied reference period in one-third of the cases, and the efficiency of additional concurrent and retrospective probing was 50 and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Cognitive interviewing techniques proved useful for developing and evaluating momentary items. Researchers should be aware of the applied reference period and of emerging problems when evaluating adapted momentary items, since not all concepts are suitable. We recommend the proposed method in future adaptations of existing instruments.

KW - Cognitive interviewing

KW - Ecological momentary assessments

KW - Patient-reported outcomes

KW - Quality-of-life measurement

KW - Thyroid diseases

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038077103&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

DO - 10.1007/s11136-017-1762-7

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29243044

AN - SCOPUS:85038077103

SN - 0962-9343

VL - 27

SP - 1065

EP - 1076

JO - Quality of Life Research

JF - Quality of Life Research

IS - 4

ER -

Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this