ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
Development and content validation of the Long COVID/ post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) or Long COVID is a post-viral complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection, causing ongoing symptoms and impaired function over a prolonged period of time. There is limited understanding of how the signs and symptoms of Long COVID/PASC affect patients' lives and how to measure them, which is essential when developing care strategies. This study aimed to develop and evaluate the content validity for a novel patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument in Long COVID/PASC through qualitative research, which was informed by the patient experience of Long COVID/PASC and both patient and clinician input.
methodsA review of literature and PRO instruments developed for Long COVID/PASC identified measurement gaps for the context of use (i.e., weekly assessment of signs/symptoms in clinical trial research). This informed the development of the preliminary Long COVID/PASC PRO instrument, which was tested via patient interviews (combined concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing) to align with regulatory standards, and discussions with clinical experts were conducted to provide clinical insights. The final instrument was modified based on this input to further promote its content validity.
resultsThirty participants were interviewed about their Long COVID/PASC experiences. Participants most frequently reported experiencing tiredness after physical activity (n = 29/30; 97%), general tiredness (n = 28/30; 93%), shortness of breath (n = 25/30; 83%), cough (n = 23/30; 77%) and muscle/body aches (n = 23/30; 77%). All participants reported that Long COVID/PASC had an impact on their health-related quality of life. Almost all (n = 27/28; 96%) sign/symptom concepts were reported in the first three sets of interviews suggesting conceptual saturation was achieved. Items, response options and the recall period of the preliminary Long COVID/PASC PRO instrument were understood as intended (≥ 90%) and relevant to most participants across both rounds (≥ 47%). Modifications were made to the instrument following patient input, resulting in the 18-item Long COVID/PASC instrument. Clinician input (n = 3) corroborated participant interview results, supporting the content validity of the Long COVID/PASC PRO instrument.
conclusionThe Long COVID/PASC PRO instrument has been developed in line with regulatory standards and the qualitative evidence demonstrated strong content validity in a Long COVID/PASC population. Research to evaluate psychometric properties will provide further evidence of the instrument's measurement properties.
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.