Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38472561›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2024

PRO-Angoff method for remote standard setting: establishing clinical thresholds for the upper digestive disease tool.

Minji K Lee, Mohamad K Abou Chaar, Shanda H Blackmon, Kathleen J Yost

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Minji K LeeDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Ave SW, 55902, Rochester, MN, USA. lee.minji@mayo.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1301-4319
Mohamad K Abou ChaarDepartment of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Shanda H BlackmonDepartment of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Kathleen J YostDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Ave SW, 55902, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

Mayo Clinic Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCaTS UL1 Supplement - Dr. Timothy Curry)UL1TR002377 · NCATS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI VESNA D GAROVIC · 2017 to 2026
$78.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002377
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Upper Digestive Disease (UDD) Tool™ is used to monitor symptom frequency, intensity, and interference across nine symptom domains and includes two Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains assessing physical and mental health. This study aimed to establish cut scores for updated symptom domains through standard setting exercises and evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of virtual standard setting.

methodsThe extended Angoff method was employed to determine cut scores. Subject matter experts refined performance descriptions for symptom control categories and achieved consensus. Domains were categorized into good, moderate, and poor symptom control. Two cut scores were established, differentiating good vs. moderate and moderate vs. poor. Panelists estimated average scores for 100 borderline patients per item. Cut scores were computed based on the sum of the average ratings for individual questions, converted to 0-100 scale.

resultsPerformance descriptions were refined. Panelists discussed that interpretation of the scores should take into account the timing of symptoms after surgery and patient populations, and the importance of items asking symptom frequency, severity, and interference with daily life. The good/moderate cut scores ranged from 21.3 to 35.0 (mean 28.6, SD 3.6) across domains, and moderate/poor ranged from 47.5 to 71.3 (mean 54.5, SD 7.0).

conclusionsPanelists were confident in the virtual standard setting process, expecting valid cut scores. Future studies can further validate the cut scores using patient perspectives and collect patient and physician preferences for displaying contextual items on patient- and physician-facing dashboard.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresPhysical ExaminationHumansMental HealthAngoff methodCut scoreRemote monitoring of symptomsStandard settingUpper digestive disease

Identifiers

PMID38472561
PMCPMC10933216

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.