Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26213480›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2015

The Outcomes and Experiences Questionnaire: development and validation.

Elizabeth Gibbons, Paul Hewitson, David Morley, Crispin Jenkinson, Ray Fitzpatrick

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03833258 (A Randomised Controlled Trial of the Impact on Function of an Unrestricted Rehabilitation Pathway of no Precautions Following Total Hip Replacement), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03833258 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Randomised Controlled Trial of the Impact on Function of an Unrestricted Rehabilitation Pathway of no Precautions Following Total Hip Replacement

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ManchesterRan2019 to 2021Enrolled95ConditionsTotal Hip ReplacementArmsRehabilitation with no precautions
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elizabeth GibbonsHealth Service Research Unit, Nuffield, Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Paul HewitsonHealth Service Research Unit, Nuffield, Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
David MorleyHealth Service Research Unit, Nuffield, Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Crispin JenkinsonHealth Service Research Unit, Nuffield, Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Ray FitzpatrickHealth Service Research Unit, Nuffield, Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis report presents evidence regarding the development and validation of a new questionnaire, the Outcomes and Experiences Questionnaire (OEQ). The rationale for the questionnaire is to bring together into one short instrument questions about two distinct domains - patients' reports of the outcomes of their care and how they experience care.

methodsThe OEQ was developed from literature reviews, iterative drafting and discussion within the research group and cognitive testing with a sample of patients who had a hospital experience. Two validation studies were carried out with an eleven item OEQ. The goals of the studies were to examine response rates and to test specific hypotheses of how OEQ should relate to other variables normally collected in the two studies. In the first study, the OEQ was added to the follow-up questionnaires for patients (n=490) receiving surgery for hip or knee replacement or varicose vein procedures participating in the national Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) program permitting the analysis of the OEQ against change scores for the measures obtained before and after surgery. In the second study the OEQ was included in a sample of patients (n=586) who had been selected to receive the National Health Service (NHS) inpatient survey from three contrasting hospital trusts.

resultsResults from study one provided consistent and substantial evidence of construct validity of OEQ particularly for those receiving hip or knee replacement. The OEQ sub-scales behaved differently and as predicted against other PROMs variables. Again hypotheses of how the two sub-scales regarding outcomes and experiences would relate to the existing domains of patient experience in the inpatient survey were broadly confirmed in study two.

conclusionThe report provides encouraging evidence of the OEQ's capacity to assess distinct reports from patients about outcomes and experiences of care within a single short questionnaire.

Indexed as

NHSpatient experiencepatient reported outcome measuresquestionnaire

Identifiers

PMID26213480
PMCPMC4509457
OpenAlexW1608515420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.