ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2020
Development and psychometric evaluation of the assessment of self-injection questionnaire: an adaptation of the self-injection assessment questionnaire.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03357471 (A Multicenter, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Safe and Effective Use of an Electro-Mechanical Injection Device), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
A Multicenter, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Safe and Effective Use of an Electro-Mechanical Injection Device (E-Device) for the Subcutaneous Self-Injection of Certolizumab Pegol Solution by Subjects With Moderate to Severe Active Rheumatoid Arthritis, Active Ankylosing Spondylitis, Active Psoriatic Arthritis, or Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Digital Clinicians" Performing Obesity Medication Self-Injection Education: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR diabetes · 2025Article
- 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
- Real-World Insights on Satisfaction and Experience with Acthar Gel via SelfJect (RISE™): A Cross-Sectional Patient Survey.Advances in therapy · 2025Observational
- Implementing Systematic Patient-Reported Measures for Chronic Conditions Through the Naveta Value-Based Telemedicine Initiative: Observational Retrospective Multicenter Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Observational
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments provide robust and effective means of evaluating patients' treatment experience; however, none adequately cover experience using self-injection devices with enhanced features, such as an electromechanical autoinjector (e-Device). The aim of this study was to develop a PRO instrument that accurately assesses patient experience of using an e-Device and to evaluate its psychometric properties.
methodsA mixed-methods approach was taken; two parallel, targeted literature reviews were conducted to identify relevant concepts and existing self-injection PRO instruments that could be adapted. Patient feedback obtained from two focus groups was used to inform initial instrument development. The pilot instrument was then administered in a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 clinical study in which patients self-injected certolizumab pegol using an e-Device, to gather evidence of its psychometric qualities. Exit interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of patients enrolled in the study to confirm the appropriateness and clarity of the items included and cognitively debrief the instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on all items, and each domain's internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's ɑ.
resultsThe literature searches identified several e-Device-specific concepts related to device features, device function, side effects/reactions/pain, confidence, and interference/convenience in daily life. Seven existing PRO instruments were identified. The Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ), containing pre- and post-injection questionnaire modules, was selected as most suitable and adapted using feedback from 19 patients in the two focus groups to form the pilot Assessment of Self-Injection (ASI) questionnaire. CFA resulted in some changes to the grouping of items in the post-injection module domains following psychometric evaluation of the ASI. Internal consistency was satisfactory for all pre- and post-injection domains (ɑ > 0.8). Cognitive debriefing results from 12 patient exit interviews confirmed the ASI's appropriateness and clarity.
conclusionsThe ASI was developed iteratively with patient input and was evaluated in its intended clinical context of use. Psychometric analyses indicated promising cross-sectional results; the ASI was well understood and considered relevant by patients self-injecting using the e-Device, suggesting that it could be used in real-world settings to aid with clinical decision making.
trial registrationNCT03357471.
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.