ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2018
Conversion of standard retrospective patient-reported outcomes to momentary versions: cognitive interviewing reveals varying degrees of momentary compatibility.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- ESM-Q: A consensus-based quality assessment tool for experience sampling method items.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Opening the contextual black box: a case for idiographic experience sampling of context for clinical applications.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Assessing and accounting for measurement in intensive longitudinal studies: current practices, considerations, and avenues for improvement.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Pressing Issues in Ecological Momentary Assessment.Annual review of clinical psychology · 2023Review
- Article
- Implementation of thyroid-related patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical practice.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Review
- Alexithymia, Emotional Distress, and Perceived Quality of Life in Patients With Hashimoto's Thyroiditis.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe 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.
methodsInitial 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.
resultsThe 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.
conclusionsCognitive 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29243044What OpenQuestion holds
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.