Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29464456›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2018

Application of validity theory and methodology to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): building an argument for validity.

Melanie Hawkins, Gerald R Elsworth, Richard H Osborne

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

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. It is linked to trial NCT04016298 (Validation of Bladder Health Instrument for Evaluation in Women), which is not on this map. Cited by 71 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04016298 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Validation of Bladder Health Instrument for Evaluation in Women

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of MinnesotaRan2019 to 2022Enrolled1,222ConditionsLower Urinary Tract Symptoms
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

71 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Emergency Department: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Item comprehension and content coverage of patient-reported outcome measures for long COVID: a qualitative study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Developing a validity testing plan for a patient-reported outcome measure in a new context using the argument-based approach to validity.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  9. The argument-based approach to validity: theory, assumptions, evidence, and consequences.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Psychometric properties, and cultural appropriateness, of patient reported outcome measures for use in primary healthcare: a scoping review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. The comprehensibility continuum: a novel method for analysing comprehensibility of patient reported outcome measures.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  19. [Measuring health literacy: methods and tools for assessing general health literacy in adults].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Melanie HawkinsHealth Systems Improvement Unit, Centre for Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, 3220, Australia. melanie.hawkins@deakin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-5704-0490
Gerald R ElsworthHealth Systems Improvement Unit, Centre for Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, 3220, Australia.
Richard H OsborneHealth Systems Improvement Unit, Centre for Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, 3220, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundData from subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are now being used in the health sector to make or support decisions about individuals, groups and populations. Contemporary validity theorists define validity not as a statistical property of the test but as the extent to which empirical evidence supports the interpretation of test scores for an intended use. However, validity testing theory and methodology are rarely evident in the PROM validation literature. Application of this theory and methodology would provide structure for comprehensive validation planning to support improved PROM development and sound arguments for the validity of PROM score interpretation and use in each new context.

objectiveThis paper proposes the application of contemporary validity theory and methodology to PROM validity testing. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE: The validity testing principles will be applied to a hypothetical case study with a focus on the interpretation and use of scores from a translated PROM that measures health literacy (the Health Literacy Questionnaire or HLQ). DISCUSSION: Although robust psychometric properties of a PROM are a pre-condition to its use, a PROM's validity lies in the sound argument that a network of empirical evidence supports the intended interpretation and use of PROM scores for decision making in a particular context. The health sector is yet to apply contemporary theory and methodology to PROM development and validation. The theoretical and methodological processes in this paper are offered as an advancement of the theory and practice of PROM validity testing in the health sector.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresReproducibility of ResultsHealth LiteracyHumansPsychometricsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesHealth literacyHealth Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)Interpretation/use argumentInterpretive argumentIUAPatient-reported outcome measurePROMQualitative methodsValidationValidityValidity argument

Identifiers

PMID29464456
PMCPMC5997725

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.