ArticlePatient related outcome measures2025
Development and Content Validity Evaluation of the Condition-Agnostic Treatment Goal Evaluation Scale (TGES) for Use in Chronic Conditions.
Article in Patient related outcome measures, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important for understanding patients' experiences with their health conditions; however, individual perspectives of meaningful change for personalized treatment goals are rarely captured. Consequently, treatment outcomes assessed in clinical trials or routine practice may not align with real-world priorities or reflect individual perspectives. To bridge this gap, we developed the 2-part treatment goal evaluation scale (TGES) to assess individuals' perspectives of whether meaningful within-patient change has occurred in their self-identified treatment goal. Methodology: The draft TGES measure included the TGES - Baseline-a single, open-ended item to identify patients' primary treatment goal when starting a new treatment for a new or ongoing condition-and the TGES - Follow-Up-2 items designed to assess patients' perspectives of whether meaningful change has occurred in their self-identified goal and overall condition. Three rounds of qualitative interviews with adults aged ≥18 years with either atopic dermatitis (AD) or migraine were conducted to revise the draft TGES and assess content validity. Results: A total of 28 participants with AD (n=15) or migraine (n=13) were included; most identified as female (60.7%) and White (78.6%). Most participants interpreted the TGES - Baseline instructions (82.1%) and item (96.4%) as intended, whereas 39.3% suggested revisions to the instructions. Overall goal categories were identified: 3 AD-specific (improving physical symptoms, sensory symptoms, and choice of clothing) and 4 migraine-specific (reduced migraine frequency, impact on activities, migraine severity, and associated symptoms other than headache). Most participants interpreted the TGES - Follow-Up instructions (100.0%) and items (96.4%; 75.0%) as intended, with minor revisions suggested to improve clarity. Conclusion: Qualitative interviews supported the content validity of the TGES for identifying individual treatment goals and assessing perspectives of meaningful change. With future quantitative evaluation, the patient-centric and condition-agnostic TGES may help evaluate personalized endpoints and inform within-patient meaningful change in clinical trial and real-world settings.
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.