ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2020
Capturing patient experience: does quality-of-life appraisal entail a new class of measurement?
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 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Opioid-use disorder and reported pain after spine surgery: Risk-group patterns in cognitive-appraisal processes in a longitudinal cohort study.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Associations of cognitive appraisal and patient activation on disability and mental health outcomes: a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing spine surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Individual differences in the long-term impact of the pandemic: moderators of COVID-related hardship, worry, and social support.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Functional Status Correlates of Change and Stability in Appraisal after Spine Surgery: Earlier versus Later Effects.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Depression trajectories during the COVID-19 pandemic: a secondary analysis of the impact of cognitive-appraisal processes.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2023Article
- Impact of comorbidities on people with and without cancer early in the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study.Cancer medicine · 2023Observational
- Double-blinded is not better than "mutually enlightened": implications of Lord-Besson et al.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2023Article
- Cognitive Processes during Recovery: Moving toward Personalized Spine Surgery Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Patient life aspirations in the context of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: a mixed-methods case-control study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- Appraisal and patient-reported outcomes following total hip arthroplasty: a longitudinal cohort study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- Drivers of caregiver impact in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a cohort study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- What should progress in response-shift research look like?Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Measuring Duchenne muscular dystrophy impact: development of a proxy-reported measure derived from PROMIS item banks.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2021Article
- Creating idiometric short-form measures of cognitive appraisal: balancing theory and pragmatics.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwo decades of research on quality-of-life (QOL) appraisal have demonstrated links between patient experience and health outcomes and have accounted for both intra-individual change and inter-individual differences in a wide range of research contexts. The present work investigates patterns across diagnostic and demographic groupings to demonstrate how population-specific circumstances drive the structure of QOL appraisal.
methodsThis secondary analysis (N = 6448) utilized data from six patient groups: spine surgery, multiple sclerosis, heterogeneous chronically ill, heterogeneous cancer, bladder cancer, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). We explored patterns of inter-item correlation across patient samples, using items from the Standards of Comparison and Sampling of Experience subsections of the QOL Appraisal Profile v1 and v2. Similar matrices were compared by demographic characteristics.
resultsPatterns of inter-item correlations for Standards of Comparison items varied sharply across disease groups and racial groups while being similar across age, gender, and education levels. Inter-item correlation matrices for Sampling of Experience items revealed marked differences among disease groups and educational and racial categories but were similar across age and gender groups.
conclusionsAppraisal parameters showed evidence of shared and unique aspects across samples and circumstances, findings which make sense in light of sample differences in health status and demographic influences. Tools to assess patient experience and meaning may be best understood as idiometric instruments. We discuss their distinctions from psychometric and clinimetric tools at theoretical, statistical, and applied levels.
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.