Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background In clinical trials for rare diseases, such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy, clinical outcome assessments (COA) used to assess treatment benefit are often generic and may not be sensitive enough to detect change in specific patient populations. Thus, there is a need for disease specific COAs that track meaningful change among individuals. When developing such measures, input from clinicians, caregivers and patients is critical for assessing clinically relevant concepts and ensuring validity of the measure. Method The aim of this study was to develop two Duchenne-specific global impression items for use in clinical trials. The development of the Duchenne Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) and Caregiver Global Impression of Change (CaGI-C) was informed by findings from concept elicitation (CE) interviews with clinicians, caregivers and individuals with Duchenne. Through cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews, clinicians and caregivers evaluated draft CGI-C and CaGI-C items to ensure relevance and understanding of the items and instructions. Suggestions made during the CD interviews were incorporated into the finalized CGI-C and CaGI-C measures. Results The symptoms most frequently reported by clinicians, caregivers and individuals with Duchenne were muscle weakness, fatigue, cardiac difficulties and pain. Regarding physical functioning, all three populations noted that small changes in functional ability were meaningful, particularly when independence was impacted. Caregivers and clinicians reported that changes in speed, endurance and quality of movement were important, as was improvement in the ability of individuals to keep up with their peers. A change in the ability to complete everyday activities was also significant to families. These results were used to create two global impression of change items and instruction documents for use by clinicians (CGI-C) and caregivers (CaGI-C). Overall, both items were well understood by participants. The descriptions and examples developed from the CE interviews were reported to be relevant and appropriate for illustrating different levels of meaningful change in patients with Duchenne. Modifications were made based on caregiver and clinician CD feedback . Conclusions As part of a holistic measurement strategy, such COA can be incorporated into the clinical trial setting to assess global changes in relevant symptoms and functional impacts associated with Duchenne.

Establishing meaningful change thresholds for Clinical Outcome Assessments (COA) is critical for score interpretation. While anchor- and distribution-based statistical methods are well-established, qualitative approaches are less frequently used. This commentary summarizes and expands on a symposium presented at the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) 2017 annual conference, which provided an overview of qualitative methods that can be used to support understanding of meaningful change thresholds on COAs. Further published literature and additional examples from multiple disease areas which have also qualitatively explored the concept of meaningful change are presented. Semi-structured interviews conducted independently from a clinical trial, exit interviews conducted in the context of a clinical trial, focus groups, vignettes and the Delphi panel method can be used to obtain data regarding meaningful change thresholds, with advantages and disadvantages to each method. Semi-structured interviews using concept elicitation (CE) or cognitive debriefing (CD) methods conducted independently from a clinical trial can be an efficient way to gain in-depth patient/caregiver insights. However, there can be challenges with reconciling heterogeneous data across diverse samples and in interpreting the qualitative insights in the context of quantitative score changes. Semi-structured qualitative interviews using CE/CD methods embedded as exit interviews in a clinical trial context with patients/caregivers can provide insights which can augment quantitative findings based on analysis of clinical trial data. However, there are logistical challenges relating to embedding the interviews in a clinical trial. Focus groups and the Delphi panel method can be valuable for reaching consensus regarding meaningful change thresholds; however, for face-to-face interactions, social desirability bias can affect responses. Finally, using vignettes and taking a mixed methods approach can aid in achieving consensus on the minimum score change endorsed by respondents as a meaningful improvement/decrement. However, the approach can be cognitively challenging for participants and reaching a consensus is not guaranteed. Anchor- and distribution- based methods remain critical in establishing responder definitions. Nonetheless, qualitative data has the potential to provide complementary support that a certain level of change on the target COA, which has been statistically supported, is truly important and meaningful for the target population.

Background Medication non-adherence is a common issue in chronic illness. The World Health Organization has recognized a need for a valid and reliable method of measuring adherence to understand and mitigate non-adherence. This study aimed to psychometrically evaluate the English version of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©), a questionnaire designed to assess patient-reported medication adherence across multiple therapy areas, in patients with Osteoarthritis (OA). Methodology Data from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme™, a survey of physicians and their consulting adult patients with OA conducted in the United States, November 2020 to March 2021, was used to assess the psychometric properties of the ADAQ. Patients completed the ADAQ, Adherence to Refills and Medication Scale (ARMS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and EQ-5D-3L. The measurement model of the 13-item ADAQ was assessed and refined using latent variable modelling (Multiple Indicator Multiple Cause, confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses, item response theory, Mokken scaling, and bifactor analyses). Correlational analyses (Spearman’s rank and polyserial as appropriate) with ARMS, WOMAC, and EQ-5D-3L scores assessed construct validity. Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were performed to estimate between-group clinically important differences (CID). Results Overall, 723 patients were included in this analysis (54.5% female, 69.0% aged ≥ 60). Latent variable modelling indicated a unidimensional reflective model was appropriate, with a bifactor model confirming an 11-item essentially unidimensional score. Items 12 and 13 were excluded from scoring as they measured a different concept. The ADAQ had high internal reliability with omega hierarchical and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.89 and 0.97, respectively. Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations with items of the ARMS, and physician-reported adherence and compliance. Mean differences in ADAQ score between high and low adherence groups yielded CID estimates between 0.49 and 1.05 points, with a correlation-weighted average of 0.81 points. Conclusion This scoring model showed strong construct validity and internal consistency reliability when assessing medication adherence in OA. Future work should focus on confirming validity across a range of disease areas.

Introduction Chronic Hand Eczema (CHE) is an inflammatory skin disease of the hands. The Hand Eczema Symptom Diary (HESD) is a new patient-reported outcome measure of worst severity of core CHE signs/symptoms. This study aimed to evaluate content and psychometric validity of the HESD. Methods The HESD was developed based on the literature and concept elicitation interviews. Qualitative cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with CHE patients to assess relevance and understanding of items, response options and recall period. Psychometric properties of the HESD (item performance, dimensionality, reliability, validity, responsiveness and estimation of meaningful change thresholds) were then assessed, first using data from a phase 2b trial (NCT03683719), and confirmed using data from the first 280 participants completing the 16-week treatment phase of a phase 3 trial (NCT04871711). Results Cognitive debriefing supported item refinement and removal of items and confirmed all items were well understood and relevant to patients. Item properties and dimensionality analyses in the phase 2b data supported removal of additional items, resulting in the 6-item HESD included in the phase 3 trial. Unidimensionality was supported by inter-item correlations (all > 0.70) and Rasch analysis. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.96) and test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient > 0.89) results were very strong. Construct validity was supported by moderate correlations with concurrent measures (0.53–0.64) and significant differences between severity groups ( p  < 0.001). Large effect sizes for mean change scores in participants that improved and significant differences between change groups indicated the ability to detect change. Anchor-based analyses supported within-individual responder definitions of ≥ 4-points for improvements in 7-day average HESD scores. Conclusion The HESD is the first CHE-specific, patient-reported outcome measure of CHE signs/symptoms developed and validated in line with regulatory guidance. This article provides evidence of strong content validity and psychometric validity and shows improvements of ≥ 4 points on 7-day average HESD scores represent clinically meaningful, important changes. Trial Registration NCT03683719, NCT04871711.

Introduction Chronic Hand Eczema (CHE) is an inflammatory skin disease that causes significant impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The Hand Eczema Impact Scale (HEIS) is a new patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure designed to assess the impact of CHE on key domains of HRQoL. This study aimed to develop and evaluate content and psychometric validity of the HEIS. Methods The HEIS was initially developed on the basis of a literature review and concept elicitation interviews. Qualitative cognitive debriefing interviews ( n  = 20) were conducted with patients with CHE to assess relevance and understanding of items, response options, and recall period. Psychometric properties (item performance, dimensionality, reliability, validity, responsiveness, and estimation of meaningful change thresholds) were then assessed using data ( n  = 258) from a phase 2b trial (NCT03683719). Results Cognitive debriefing confirmed all items were understood and relevant to patients. Inter-item correlations (all > 0.50) and confirmatory factor analysis (factor loadings ≥ 0.80) supported unidimensionality of the HEIS score, and mostly provided support for the HEIS Proximal Daily Activity Limitations (PDAL) score, with only one item loading below the prespecified threshold. Item properties and previous qualitative work supported retaining this item in the total score but removed from the HEIS PDAL domain. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha ≥ 0.89) and test–retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient ≥ 0.79) results were very strong. Strong correlations with concurrent measures (0.66–0.87) and significant differences between severity groups ( p  < 0.001) supported construct validity. Large effect sizes for mean change scores in participants that improved and significant differences between groups indicated ability to detect change. Anchor-based analyses supported within-individual responder definitions of ≥ 1.3 points for improvements in both HEIS score and HEIS PDAL score (covering three items) and of ≥ 1.5 points for HEIS embarrassment with the appearance of hands (Emb) score (covering two items). Conclusions The 9-item HEIS is the first CHE-specific PRO measure developed and validated according to regulatory guidance for assessment of the impact of CHE on key domains of HRQoL. This article provides evidence of strong content and psychometric validity and shows improvements of ≥ 1.3 points in HEIS score and HEIS PDAL score, and improvements of ≥ 1.5 points in HEIS Emb score represent clinically meaningful, important changes. Trial Registration NCT03683719.

Background The 32-item Motor Function Measure (MFM32) is a clinician-reported outcome measure used to assess the functional abilities of individuals with neuromuscular diseases, including those with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). This two-part study explored the relationship between the functional abilities assessed in the MFM32 and activities of daily living (ADLs) from the perspective of individuals with Type 2 and Type 3 (non-ambulant and ambulant) SMA and their caregivers through qualitative interviews and a quantitative online survey. Methods In-depth, semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with individuals with SMA and caregivers from the US. Subsequently, a quantitative online survey was completed by individuals with SMA or their caregivers from France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Canada, the United States (US) and the UK. In both parts of the study, participants were asked to describe the ADLs considered to be related to the functional abilities assessed in the MFM32. Results from the qualitative interviews informed the content of the quantitative online survey. Results Qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 adult participants, and 217 participants completed the quantitative online survey. From the qualitative interviews, all of the functional abilities assessed in the patient-friendly MFM32 were deemed as related to one or more ADL. The specific ADLs that participants considered related to the patient-friendly MFM32 items could be grouped into 10 key ADL domains: dressing, mobility/transferring, self-care, self-feeding, reaching, picking up and holding objects, physical activity, writing and technology use, social contact/engagement, toileting and performing work/school activities. These results were confirmed by the quantitative online survey whereby the ADLs reported to be related to each patient-friendly MFM32 item were consistent and could be grouped into the same 10 ADL domains. Conclusion This study provides in-depth evidence from the patient/caregiver perspective supporting the relevance of the patient-friendly MFM32 items to the ADLs of individuals with Type 2 and Type 3 SMA.

Background The Chronic Ocular Pain Questionnaire (COP-Q) is a newly developed patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure intended to assess symptoms and impacts associated with Chronic Ocular Surface Pain (COSP). This study assessed the psychometric properties of the COP-Q to determine the adequacy of the COP-Q as a ‘fit-for-purpose’ instrument to derive trial endpoints for future clinical studies in COSP. Methods Patients with COSP completed the COP-Q daily for four weeks on an electronic, touch-screen, tablet device as part of a longitudinal, observational study in the United States ( N  = 124). Analyses were conducted to assess item properties, dimensionality and scoring, reliability and validity, and interpretation of scores. In addition, 4-hour and 24-hour recall period versions of the COP-Q Symptom Module were compared. Results Item responses were distributed across the full response scale for most COP-Q items. Inter-item correlations did not identify any redundant items ( r  > 0.90) and all items correlated at > 0.40 in their respective module. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) provided acceptable support for the unidimensional structure of the multi-item scales in the COP-Q and calculation of a total score for each module. However, CFA and Rasch analysis outlined potential redundant items for the COP-Q Visual Tasking Module (VTM), which were removed, resulting in a six-item VTM. The multi-item COP-Q modules had excellent internal consistency (α range = 0.91–0.96) and suggested fair to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC/Kappa range = 0.651–0.940) for all COP-Q modules. Construct validity for all COP-Q modules was supported by a logical pattern of correlations with concurrent measures and evidence of ability to distinguish between known-groups, with statistically significant differences between COSP severity groups. Paired t-tests, coefficient of determination (CoD) and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) showed statistically significant differences between the two recall period versions of the Symptom Module, although the magnitude of the difference was small, and each version shares a high level of reproducibility in scores. Conclusions Findings provide evidence that the COP-Q is a valid and reliable measure of patient-reported COSP symptoms and impacts for use in future clinical trials in COSP. Both 4-hour and 24-hour Symptom Module recall period versions are likely to yield consistent results and are equally robust.

Introduction Chronic ocular surface pain (COSP) is described as a persistent, moderate-to-severe pain at the ocular surface lasting more than 3 months. Symptoms of COSP have a significant impact on patients’ vision-dependent activities of daily living (ADL) and distal health-related quality of life (HRQoL). To adequately capture patient perspectives in clinical trials, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures must demonstrate sufficient evidence of content validity in the target population. This study aimed to explore the patient experience of living with COSP and evaluate content validity of the newly developed Chronic Ocular Pain Questionnaire (COP-Q) for use in COSP clinical trials. Methods Qualitative, combined concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews were conducted with 24 patients experiencing COSP symptoms in the USA. Interviews were supplemented with real-time data collection via a daily diary app task in a subset of patients ( n  = 15) to explore the day-to-day patient experience. Three healthcare professionals (HCPs) from the USA, Canada, and France were also interviewed to provide a clinical perspective. CE results were used to further inform development of a conceptual model and to refine PRO items/response options. CD interviews assessed relevance and understanding of the COP-Q. Interviews were conducted across multiple rounds to allow item modifications and subsequent testing. Results Eye pain, eye itch, burning sensation, eye dryness, eye irritation, foreign body sensation, eye fatigue, and eye grittiness were the most frequently reported symptoms impacting vision-dependent ADL (e.g., reading, using digital devices, driving) and wider HRQoL (e.g., emotional wellbeing, social functioning, work). COP-Q instructions, items, and response scales were understood, and concepts were considered relevant. Feedback supported modifications to instruction/item wording and confirmed the most appropriate recall periods. Conclusions Findings support content validity of the COP-Q for use in COSP populations. Ongoing research to evaluate psychometric validity of the COP-Q will support future use of the instrument in clinical trial efficacy endpoints.

Background Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) is a leading cause of hospitalization and serious respiratory illness in infants/young children. The objectives of this study were to (1) identify important RSV-related signs of illness in infants that were observed by the parent/caregiver of the child and (2) assess content validity and usability of the Pediatric RSV Electronic Severity and Outcomes Rating System (PRESORS) to monitor signs of RSV-related illness. Methods Review of medical literature identified signs of pediatric RSV-related illness in PRESORS. Semi-structured interviews with caregivers of infants (0–24 months of age) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed RSV infection (in the two months prior to recruitment) were conducted to spontaneously elicit signs and impacts of the infant’s illness from caregiver observations. Caregivers completed PRESORS using a “think-aloud” protocol to confirm comprehension, relevance, and usability of the smartphone application. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis methods and Atlas.ti software. Results Interviews with 21 caregivers confirmed PRESORS captured 23/26 signs caregivers spontaneously reported. Cough, difficulty breathing, problems sleeping, and reduced feeding/drinking were the most worrying signs of severe RSV-related illness described. Cognitive debriefing indicated that caregivers: understood the wording of all PRESORS items and response options (except how to count heartbeats), recall periods were appropriate, and the PRESORS smartphone application was easy to use. Minor changes to enhance content validity were identified. Conclusions In-depth interviews confirmed content validity and usability of the PRESORS by caregivers of infants with RSV. Next steps are to assess the revised PRESORS in clinical studies and evaluate its measurement properties.

Background The Near Visual Acuity Questionnaire Presbyopia (NAVQ-P) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure that was developed in a phakic presbyopia population to assess near vision function impacts. The study refined and explored the psychometric properties and score interpretability of the NAVQ-P and additional PRO items assessing near vision correction independence (NVCI), near vision satisfaction (NVS), and near vision correction preference (NVCP). Methods This was a psychometric validation study conducted using PRO data collected as part of a Phase IIb clinical trial (CUN8R44 A2202) consisting of 235 randomized adults with presbyopia from the US, Japan, Australia, and Canada. Data collected at baseline, week 2, and months 1, 2, and 3 during the 3-month trial treatment period were included in the analyses to assess item (question) properties, NAVQ-P dimensionality and scoring, reliability, validity, and score interpretation. Results Item responses were distributed across the full response scale for most NAVQ-P and additional PRO items. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the pre-defined unidimensional structure and calculation of a NAVQ-P total score as a measure of near vision function. Item deletion informed by item response distributions, dimensionality analyses, item response theory, and previous qualitative findings, including clinical input, supported retention of 14 NAVQ-P items. The 14-item NAVQ-P total score had excellent internal consistency (α = 0.979) and high test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients > = 0.898). There was good evidence of construct-related validity for all PROs supported by strong correlations with concurrent measures. Excellent results for known-groups validity and ability to detect change analyses were also demonstrated. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods supported interpretation of scores through generation of group-level and within-individual estimates of meaningful change thresholds. A meaningful within-patient change in the range of 8-15-point improvement on the NAVQ-P total score (score range 0–42) was recommended, including a more specific responder definition of 10-point improvement. Conclusions The NAVQ-P, NVCI, and NVS are valid and reliable instruments which have the ability to detect change over time. Findings strongly support the use of these measures as outcome assessments in clinical/research studies and in clinical practice in the presbyopia population.