Capturing and missing the patient's story through outcome measures: A thematic comparison of patient‐generated items in PSYCHLOPS with CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9 |
| |
| Authors: | Célia MD Sales PhD Inês TD Neves MSc Paula G. Alves PhD Mark Ashworth DM |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Faculty of Psychology and Education Science at the University of Porto (FPCEUP), Center for Psychology at the University of Porto (CPUP), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal;2. Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal;3. Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE), Cis‐IUL, Lisboa, Portugal;4. Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK;5. Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | Background There is increasing interest in individualized patient‐reported outcome measures (I‐PROMS), where patients themselves indicate the specific problems they want to address in therapy and these problems are used as items within the outcome measurement tool. Objective This paper examined the extent to which 279 items reported in an I‐PROM (PSYCHLOPS) added qualitative information which was not captured by two well‐established outcome measures (CORE‐OM and PHQ‐9). Design Comparison of items was only conducted for patients scoring above the “caseness” threshold on the standardized measures. Setting and patients 107 patients were participating in therapy within addiction and general psychiatric clinical settings. Main results Almost every patient (95%) reported at least one item whose content was not covered by PHQ‐9, and 71% reported at least one item not covered by CORE‐OM. Discussion Results demonstrate the relevance of individualized outcome assessment for capturing data describing the issues of greatest concern to patients, as nomothetic measures do not always seem to capture the whole story. |
| |
| Keywords: | individualised PROMS outcome assessment patient‐centred outome patient‐generated measures thematic analysis |
|
|
