ArticleEuropean burn journal2024
Measurement Equivalence and Feasibility of the Electronic and Paper Versions of the POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI: A Randomized Crossover Trial.
Article in European burn journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial within person-centered care. The use of electronic PROMs (ePROMs) is increasing and multiple advantages have been described. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a validated paper questionnaire to assess patient-reported scar quality in the burn and scar population. In burn and scar rehabilitation, quality of life questionnaires such as the Euroqol 5 Dimensions 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) allow us to measure physical and psychosocial impact. The goal of this research was to compare the equivalence of the electronic versions of the POSAS, the EQ-5D-5L, and the DLQI with their original paper counterparts. To ensure the psychometric properties of the electronic versions, we assessed the equivalence of scores, the differences in completion time, and patients' preferred mode and ease of use. We used a randomized crossover design using a within-subject comparison of the formats of the questionnaires. Participants aged over 18 with a scar were recruited from an outpatient after-care and research center for burns and scars in Antwerp, Belgium. The equivalence of the electronic questionnaires POSAS, EQ-5D-5L, and DLQI is assumed based on the findings of this study. Completion times were faster for all the electronic versions but only statistically different (
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.