Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32367451›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2020

Development of the neurotrophic keratopathy questionnaire: qualitative research.

Lindsey T Murray, Julie McCormack, Ioana Grobeiu, Ingela Wiklund, Miriam Kimel, Floortje Van Nooten

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Incidence, prevalence, and outcome of moderate to severe neurotrophic keratopathy in a German tertiary referral center from 2013 to 2017.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lindsey T MurrayEvidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.
Julie McCormackEvidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.
Ioana GrobeiuDompé farmaceutici S.p.A, Via Santa Lucia, 6, 20122, Milan, MI, Italy.
Ingela WiklundEvidera, The Ark, 201 Talgarth Rd, London, W6 8BJ, UK.
Miriam KimelEvidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA. miriam.kimel@evidera.com.
Floortje Van NootenDompé farmaceutici S.p.A, Via Santa Lucia, 6, 20122, Milan, MI, Italy.
Ithaka Harbors · USDompé (Italy) · IT

Funding

Dompé farmaceutici S.p.A. Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeurotrophic keratopathy/keratitis (NK) is a rare disease of the cornea that can lead to anatomical loss of the eye. Little is known about the NK experience from the patients' perspective. The objectives of this study were to examine the symptomatic experience and impacts of NK on patients and assess the overall comprehension, relevance, and content validity of a new questionnaire.

methodsThis was a cross-sectional, qualitative study conducted with NK patients with varying levels of disease severity, recruited from one clinical site. One-on-one interviews using concept elicitation and cognitive interviewing techniques were conducted.

resultsFourteen NK patients participated; 64.3% were female (n = 9), mean age was 65.7 ± 13.3, and 14.3% (n = 2), 21.4% (n = 3), and 64.3% (n = 9) were classified as Mackie stage I, stage II, or stage III, respectively. Participants reported 24 concepts, including: redness (n = 12, 86%), sensitivity to light (n = 11, 79%), general discomfort (n = 9, 64%), dry eye (n = 9, 64%), reduced visual acuity (n = 9, 64%), blurred vision (n = 8, 57%), and eye fatigue (n = 8, 57%). No new concepts were reported after the 13th interview. The most frequently reported impacts included frustration (n = 10, 71%), driving impairment (n = 8, 57%), reading impairment (n = 7, 50%), difficulty watching television (n = 7, 50%), and concern with potentially losing their eyesight due to NK (n = 6, 43%). Participants provided positive feedback on the draft NK Questionnaire (NKQ) and felt that it was comprehensive and relevant to their experience with NK. Additionally, the recall period, instructions, item concepts, and response options were well-understood by participants. Minor revisions were made to the tool for consistency (i.e., the timeframe "in the past 7 days" was added to items 12-14); item 14 was modified to include "how often"; examples were added to item 9.

conclusionsThe results of the concept elicitation portion of the qualitative study support the content validity of the draft NKQ. The clinically significant concepts identified in the literature and raised during concept elicitation are included as items in the questionnaire. Further assessment of the psychometric properties should be conducted in support of this new tool to measure the effect of new treatments on symptoms and impacts associated with NK.

Indexed as

Content validityInstrument developmentInterviewsPatient-reported outcome

Identifiers

PMID32367451
PMCPMC7198680
OpenAlexW3021411912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.