ArticleBMJ open2020
Response process validity of three patient reported outcome measures for people requiring kidney care: a think-aloud study using the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2021Pooled it
- Measuring health-related quality of life and well-being in adults with fecal incontinence: a comparative psychometric evaluation.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Trial
- Validation of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Life Participation Instrument in People with CKD.Kidney360 · 2026Article
- Content validity, face validity and comprehensiveness of generic quality-of-life measures in adults and children with rare genetic conditions and their carers: a think aloud qualitative study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Thinking-aloud methodology applied to health questionnaire development and validation: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- The feasibility and validity of the EQ-5D-Y and CHU9D in a challenging context: adolescent mental health in India.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Article
- Validation of a Core Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Life Participation in Kidney Transplant Recipients: the SONG Life Participation Instrument.Kidney international reports · 2024Article
- Economic evaluation of dialysis and comprehensive conservative care for chronic kidney disease using the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D-5L; a comparison of evaluation instruments.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2023Article
- Fluctuations of health states in dementia diseases and their impact on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L: Protocol of a mixed-methods study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- A think-aloud study of the feasibility of patients with end-stage organ failure completing the ICECAP-SCM.Palliative medicine · 2022Article
- Validation and comparison of five preference-based measures among age-related macular degeneration patients: evidence from mainland China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- What does a "good life" mean for people living with dementia? A protocol for a think-aloud study informing the value of care.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Comparing the measurement properties of the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O instruments in ages 50-70: a cross-sectional study on a representative sample of the Hungarian general population.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021Article
- Validity arguments for patient-reported outcomes: justifying the intended interpretation and use of data.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the response process validity, feasibility of completion, acceptability and preferences for three patient-reported outcome measures that could be used in economic evaluation-the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O-in people requiring kidney care.
designParticipants were asked to 'think-aloud' while completing the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O, followed by a semistructured interview. Five raters identified errors or struggles in completing the measures from the think-aloud component of the transcripts. Patient preferences for measures were extracted from the semistructured interview.
settingEligible patients were identified through a large UK secondary care renal centre.
participantsIn total, 30 participants were included in the study, consisting of patients attending renal outpatients for chronic kidney disease (n=18), with a functioning kidney transplant (n=6) and receiving haemodialysis (n=6).
resultsParticipants had few errors and struggles in completing the EQ-5D-5L (11% error rate, 3% struggle rate), ICECAP-A (2% error rate, 2% struggle rate) and ICECAP-O (4% error rate, 3% struggle rate). The main errors with the EQ-5D-5L were judgements that did not comply with the 'your health today' instruction. Comprehension errors were most prominent on ICECAP-O. Judgement errors were the only errors reported on ICECAP-A. Although the EQ-5D-5L had slightly more errors and struggles, it was the measure most preferred, with participants able to make a clearer link with EQ-5D-5L and their health condition.
conclusionsThe EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O are feasible for people requiring kidney care to complete and can be included in studies conducting economic evaluations of kidney care interventions. Further research is required to assess how health (eg, EQ-5D) and capability (eg, ICECAP) measures can be included in an economic evaluation simultaneously, as well as what ICECAP measure(s) to include when patient groups straddle the age ranges for ICECAP-A (18 years and older) and ICECAP-O (65 years and older).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.