ReviewThe patient2026
Using a Timeline Activity in Virtual Concept Elicitation Interviews with Youth: Methods and Lessons Learned from an Interpretive Descriptive Study to Develop a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (GENDER-Q Youth).
Review in The patient, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- GENDER-Q Youth Patient-Reported Outcome Measure: Protocol for an International Cross-Sectional Field Test Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Youth Receiving Gender-Affirming Care: The GENDER-Q Youth Module.Transgender health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
One-to-one interviews and focus groups are used to generate qualitative data about patients' health outcomes and inform the development of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). In the development of PROMs for young people, visual elicitation tools can be used with one-to-one interviews and focus groups to enhance the data generation process and data quality. This article aims to (1) provide a detailed description of how visual elicitation tools can be applied in the development of youth-specific PROMs using the GENDER-Q Youth study as an example and (2) share the lessons learned from the GENDER-Q Youth study with PROM developers who are considering using visual elicitation tools in their own virtual qualitative studies. This article discusses processes that took place within the context of a mixed-methods, multi-step study to develop a PROM for youth receiving gender-affirming care called GENDER-Q Youth. Step one was an applied qualitative health research study using an interpretive description approach. Virtual concept elicitation interviews were conducted with transgender and gender diverse youth aged 12-18 years at recruitment using an optional timeline-based visual elicitation tool (i.e., before interviews, youth were invited to create a timeline about their gender-affirming care journeys). The research team navigated ethical and logistical challenges associated with using timeline activities during the data generation process. These challenges occurred during the pre-interview stage (e.g., mailing activity supplies) and during interviews (e.g., incorporating the timeline activity into the interview). Details about the approach used by the research team, challenges faced, and lessons learned are discussed. When conducting one-to-one virtual concept elicitation interviews, visual elicitation tools have the potential to enhance the quality of data generated about participants' outcomes and experiences of healthcare. Visual elicitation tools can also improve the interview experiences of both participants and researchers and are feasible to implement within the context of qualitative PROM development research with young people.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40952443What 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.