Haverman, L., Luijten, M.A.J., Blackford, A.L. et al. (7 more authors) (2024) Truth and Dare: Patients Dare To Tell The Truth When Using PROMs in Clinical Practice. Quality of Life Research, 33. pp. 3299-3307. ISSN 0962-9343
Abstract
Purpose
As patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in clinical practice for screening, monitoring, and management, the potential for response bias has been raised (e.g., over-reporting problems for attention, under-reporting to avoid treatment changes/discontinuation). We investigated whether patients systematically bias their responses when they know clinicians will review their PROM results.
Methods
We conducted secondary analyses of three experimental studies evaluating PROMs in adult and pediatric care. Prior to PROM completion, intervention group patients were informed that the results would be shown to their clinicians (“feedback” arm), whereas control group patients were told that their clinicians would not see their responses (“no feedback” arm). Independent sample t-tests compared the “feedback” and “no feedback” arms’ PROM scores at baseline. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using Cohen’s d statistics with Hedges’ g correction, and effect sizes > 0.50 were considered clinically relevant.
Results
Across the 29 domains assessed in the three studies, no between-arm differences reached an effect size of ± 0.50. Only 3/29 effect sizes exceeded ± 0.30. The confidence intervals for 14 domains included ± 0.50, with 4 favoring the “no feedback” arm and 10 favoring the “feedback” arm. Two domains reached statistical significance, one favoring the “no feedback” arm and one favoring the “feedback” arm.
Conclusion
This study does not support the hypothesis that patients systematically bias their PROM responses if they know that clinicians will see their results. These findings support using PROMs in clinical practice as a valid mechanism to promote patient-centered care.
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | © The Author(s) 2024. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
Keywords: | Patient-reported outcome measures, Clinical practice, Validity, Bias |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Medicine and Health (Leeds) > School of Medicine (Leeds) > Leeds Institute of Medical Research (LIMR) > Division of Oncology |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 10 Sep 2024 14:57 |
Last Modified: | 06 Mar 2025 14:17 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Springer |
Identification Number: | 10.1007/s11136-024-03772-3 |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:217018 |