[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There has been increasing interest in the measurement of hedonic well-being (HWB), due in part to its broad implications in areas such as health and society. The day reconstruction method (DRM) is a validated technique assessing HWB and daily activities using instructions that help respondents recover their experiences from the previous day, thus reducing recall bias. Unfortunately, large-scale surveys are typically not able to implement the time-consuming DRM procedure; instead, they rely on single-item or very brief questionnaire assessment of HWB and time usage. Despite their wide use, brief questionnaires have rarely been compared to the DRM, which could provide validation of these short assessments. In the present study we compared these two questionnaire formats in 45 adults who completed both a DRM and a “hybrid” short form (HSF) questionnaire that included a very brief procedure to reconstruct yesterday’s events. Results were that the mean HSF ratings tended to overestimate HWB in comparison to the DRM, though effects were generally small to moderate. With regard to estimates of time spent on daily activities, the HSF also differed from the DRM, though with generally small to moderate effects. Correlations between estimates indicated that the HSF explained an average of almost half the variance in the DRM ratings for both HWB (rs ranging from .52 to .97) and time use (rs ranging from .43 to .85). In general, HSF ratings displayed considerable overlap with those of the DRM though the brief instructions apparently did not eliminate recall bias in the shorter questionnaire.
Social Indicators Research 02/2014; 115:907-915. · 1.26 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objective
This study examined the ecological validity and clinical utility of NIH Patient Reported-Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) instruments for anger, depression, and fatigue in women with premenstrual symptoms.
One-hundred women completed daily diaries and weekly PROMIS assessments over 4 weeks. Weekly assessments were administered through Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT). Weekly CATs and corresponding daily scores were compared to evaluate ecological validity. To test clinical utility, we examined if CATs could detect changes in symptom levels, if these changes mirrored those obtained from daily scores, and if CATs could identify clinically meaningful premenstrual symptom change.
PROMIS CAT scores were higher in the pre-menstrual than the baseline (ps < .0001) and post-menstrual (ps < .0001) weeks. The correlations between CATs and aggregated daily scores ranged from .73 to .88 supporting ecological validity. Mean CAT scores showed systematic changes in accordance with the menstrual cycle and the magnitudes of the changes were similar to those obtained from the daily scores. Finally, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses demonstrated the ability of the CATs to discriminate between women with and without clinically meaningful premenstrual symptom change.
PROMIS CAT instruments for anger, depression, and fatigue demonstrated validity and utility in premenstrual symptom assessment. The results provide encouraging initial evidence of the utility of PROMIS instruments for the measurement of affective premenstrual symptoms.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Pain diaries are important tools for clinical trials and optimal assay sensitivity of outcomes derived from diaries is a worthwhile goal. Jensen and colleagues recently reported results suggesting that single-day diary-based outcomes could possibly be as psychometrically sound as outcomes based on taking the average of many diaries.
In this paper we attempt to replicate those results with several diary data sets.
We come to different conclusions than advanced by Jensen and colleagues, and conclude that their results were unusual in that very high test-retest reliability among days was found. With our four diary datasets we find that aggregating multiple diaries yields more reliable outcomes and improved sensitivity. We suggest that using single-day diaries will often lead to underpowered studies, and that pre-testing is advised before adopting single-day diaries. We also suggest that other researchers replicate these findings within their diary-based clinical trials.
The Clinical journal of pain 11/2013; · 3.01 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Daily assessments can provide insight into the temporal characteristics of fatigue. They can demonstrate consistency or reveal variability, as when fatigue changes with the underlying medical condition, improves with therapy, or worsens as a medication side effect. We adapted a fatigue measure from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) for daily assessment and examined its psychometric properties in a month-long prospective study.
Three groups of 100 participants each were drawn from two fatigue-related clinical disorders [osteoarthritis (OA) and premenstrual syndrome/premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMS/PMDD)], and a general population sample (GP). They completed brief daily web-based fatigue measures at home on 28 consecutive evenings.
Compliance was high for all samples, based on the percent of participants who remained in the study (98 % for GP and OA, 95 % for PMS/PMDD). The new scale performed consistently across the groups, sensitively measuring fatigue with high reliability (>0.90) especially in the average to high fatigue level range. Supporting known-groups validity, fatigue scores were elevated in the clinical groups as compared to the GP. The scale was sensitive to change, with the PMS/PMDD sample showing a linear increase in fatigue prior to menses onset, and a sharp drop off afterward.
The scale was psychometrically sound across diverse clinical and general population samples, though less reliable when assessing lower levels of fatigue.
Quality of Life Research 10/2013; · 2.41 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Patient-reported outcome measures with reporting periods of a week or more are often used to evaluate the change of symptoms over time, but the accuracy of recall in the context of change is not well understood. This study examined whether temporal trends in symptoms that occur during the reporting period impact the accuracy of 7-day recall reports.
Women with premenstrual symptoms (n=95) completed daily reports of anger, depression, fatigue, and pain intensity for 4weeks, as well as 7-day recall reports at the end of each week. Latent class growth analysis was used to categorize recall periods based on the direction and rate of change in the daily reports. Agreement (level differences and correlations) between 7-day recall and aggregated daily scores was compared for recall periods with different temporal trends.
Recall periods with positive, negative, and flat temporal trends were identified and they varied in accordance with weeks of the menstrual cycle. Replicating previous research, 7-day recall scores were consistently higher than aggregated daily scores, but this level difference was more pronounced for recall periods involving positive and negative trends compared with flat trends. Moreover, correlations between 7-day recall and aggregated daily scores were lower in the presence of positive and negative trends compared with flat trends. These findings were largely consistent for anger, depression, fatigue, and pain intensity.
Temporal trends in symptoms can influence the accuracy of recall reports and this should be considered in research designs involving change.
Journal of psychosomatic research 08/2013; 75(2):160-6. · 2.91 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: The Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) has developed assessment tools for numerous PROs, most using a 7-day recall format. We examined whether modifying the recall period for use in daily diary research would affect the psychometric characteristics of several PROMIS measures. METHODS: Daily versions of short-forms for three PROMIS domains (pain interference, fatigue, depression) were administered to a general population sample (n = 100) for 28 days. Analyses used multilevel item response theory (IRT) models. We examined differential item functioning (DIF) across recall periods by comparing the IRT parameters from the daily data with the PROMIS 7-day recall IRT parameters. Additionally, we examined whether the IRT parameters for day-to-day within-person changes are invariant to those for between-person (cross-sectional) differences in PROs. RESULTS: Dimensionality analyses of the daily data suggested a single dimension for each PRO domain, consistent with PROMIS instruments. One-third of the daily items showed uniform DIF when compared with PROMIS 7-day recall, but the impact of DIF on the scale level was minor. IRT parameters for within-person changes differed from between-person parameters for 3 depression items, which were more sensitive for measuring change than between-person differences, but not for pain interference and fatigue items. Notably, mean scores from daily diaries were significantly lower than the PROMIS 7-day recall norms. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide initial evidence supporting the adaptation of PROMIS measures for daily diary research. However, scores from daily diaries cannot be directly interpreted on PROMIS norms established for 7-day recall.
Quality of Life Research 11/2012; · 2.41 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Careful reviews and meta-analyses have made valuable contributions to understanding the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for cancer patients. An important next step is to determine the mediators that explain the influence of efficacious interventions on outcomes. This systematic review summarizes tests of mediating variables from twenty-two projects conducted from 1989-2010. Although all authors provided some type of rationale for considering particular mediating relationships, the investigations varied widely with respect to the extent to which formal theoretical constructs were tested, the type and goals of the interventions studied, and the broad types of outcomes and potential mediators examined. Although there was some evidence supporting selected mediating relationships, with positive findings often found when mediating variables represented behaviors targeted by an intervention, the findings were mixed. Expanding the focus of research to include mechanisms in psychosocial oncology intervention research is necessary for providing a unified picture of how mediating relationships may be operating in this field.
Behavioral Medicine 07/2012; 38(3):90-114. · 1.03 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We propose several different patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from momentary, real-time collection of symptom data. In addition to the mean of momentary reports of symptoms, other types of summaries can reflect different aspects of the symptom experience.
With secondary analyses of two studies of patients with chronic pain assessed with real-time methods, we demonstrate principles for developing outcomes that summarize symptom experience during a 1-week period. These studies focused on pain intensity, which is used to demonstrate methods for creating summary momentary measures.
Analyses from the first study (Pain 2008;139:146-57) yielded outcome measures based on the mean, median, 90th percentile, maximum, standard deviation, proportion of reports with no pain, proportion of reports with pain more than 50 (on a 0- to 100-point scale), and time-contingent measures. The second study examined the performance of these measures (and the mean) in a longitudinal study, in which some patients changed treatment (n = 78), making pain reduction likely, whereas others had no treatment change (n = 27). The measure that best discriminated the groups was the proportion of momentary reports without pain (effect size = 0.50), closely followed by the mean of all reports (effect size = 0.45). Most measures also correlated with patients' global impression of their change (between 0.39 and 0.55, except for standard deviation [0.13]).
These analyses suggest that momentary symptom data can be useful for developing new PROs that reflect symptom experience other than the mean. They highlight knowledge gleaned from real-time studies, which deepens our understanding of symptoms by demonstrating which changes in symptoms are associated with overall perceived change.
Psychosomatic Medicine 05/2012; 74(4):387-97. · 4.08 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This report examines day-to-day variability in rheumatology patients' ratings of pain and related quality-of-life variables as well as predictors of that variability. Data from 2 studies were used. The hypothesis was that greater psychological distress (i.e., depression and anxiety) and poorer coping appraisals (i.e., higher pain catastrophizing and lower self-efficacy) are associated with more variability. Electronic daily diary ratings were collected from 106 patients from a community rheumatology practice across 28 days (study 1) and from 194 osteoarthritis patients across 7 days (study 2). In multilevel modeling analyses, substantial day-to-day variability was evident for all variables in both studies, and individual patients differed considerably and somewhat reliably in the magnitude of their variability. Higher levels of depression significantly predicted greater variability in pain, as well as in happiness and frustration (study 1). Lower self-efficacy was associated with more variability in patients' daily satisfaction with accomplishments and in the quality of their day (study 2). Greater pain catastrophizing and higher depression predicted more variability in interference with social relationships (study 2). Anxiety was not significantly associated with day-to-day variability. The results of these studies suggest that individual differences in the magnitude of symptom fluctuation may play a vital role in understanding patients' adjustment to pain. Future research will be needed to examine the clinical utility of measuring variability in patients' pain and well-being, and to understand whether reducing variability may be an important treatment target.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined the ecological validity of sleep experience reports across different lengths of reporting periods. The accuracy of item responses on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) across 3-, 7-, and 28-day reporting periods was examined in relation to electronic daily item ratings. Primary care clinic patients (N = 119) were recruited, and were not required to have sleep problems to participate. Analyses found few differences in item scores when electronic daily ratings were compared with recall ratings, regardless of the length of the reporting period. However, within-subjects analyses indicated low levels of accuracy in recall of sleep items for specific days in the last week. Thus, for the purpose of between-subject comparisons, patients generally can provide accurate recall of sleep experiences; studies requiring finer-grained analysis across time and within-subjects require daily diary methodology.
Behavioral Sleep Medicine 01/2012; · 1.13 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There are many beliefs about the patterning of positive and negative mood over the course of the week. Support has been found for ‘Blue Monday’, ‘Thank God it's Friday’ and Weekdays versus Weekend effects, although in relatively small studies and often with student samples. Using telephone questionnaire data from a large national survey (N = 340,000), we examined day-of-week (DOW) effects on positive and negative moods. Unlike prior studies, we also tested the potential moderating effects of four demographic variables on DOW. Strong support was found for better mood on weekends and Fridays, but there was minimal support for a Blue Monday effect and no differences were observed between Saturdays and Sundays. Demographics moderated some DOW effects: DOW effects were diminished for older and retired respondents, but there was little DOW difference by gender or presence of a partner. DOW is associated with mood, but not always in ways we believe.
The Journal of Positive Psychology 01/2012; · 1.67 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to develop a measure of diabetes-specific parenting goals for parents of children with type 1 diabetes and to examine whether parenting goals predict a change in parenting involvement in disease management. An independent sample of primary caretakers of 87 children aged 10 to 16 years with type 1 diabetes completed the measure of parenting goals (diabetes-specific and general goals); both parent and child completed measures of parent responsibility for diabetes management at baseline and 6 months. Parents ranked diabetes-specific parenting goals as more important than general parenting goals, and rankings were moderately stable over time. Parenting goals were related to parent responsibility for diabetes management. The relative ranking of diabetes-specific parenting goals predicted changes in parent involvement over 6 months, with baseline ranking of goals predicting more parental involvement at follow-up. Parenting goals may play an important role in family management of type 1 diabetes.
Journal of Child Health Care 09/2011; 15(3):199-209. · 0.77 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Clinical research often relies on retrospective recall of symptom levels, but the information contained in these ratings is not well understood. The "peak-and-end rule" suggests that the most intense (peak) and final (end) moments of an experience disproportionately influence retrospective judgments, which may bias self-reports of somatic symptoms. This study examined the extent to which peak and end symptom levels systematically affect patients' day-to-day recall of pain and fatigue. Rheumatology patients (N = 97) completed 5 to 6 momentary ratings of pain and fatigue per day as well as a daily recall rating of these symptoms for 28 consecutive days. For pain, peak and end momentary ratings predicted daily recall of average pain beyond the actual average of momentary ratings. This effect was small, yet was confirmed in both between-person and within-person (repeated measures) analyses. For fatigue, neither peak nor end momentary symptoms significantly contributed to daily recall. Of note, the evidence for peak- and end-effects in recall of pain and fatigue varied significantly between individual patients. These findings suggest that peak- and end-effects create a small bias in recall reports of pain, but not fatigue. However, there are considerable individual differences in susceptibility to peak and end heuristics. PERSPECTIVE: The peak-end cognitive heuristic could bias end-of-day recall of pain and fatigue. An effect was shown for pain, but not for fatigue. The effects were small and were unlikely to substantially bias end-of-day assessments. Individuals were shown to differ in the degree that the heuristic was associated with recall.
The journal of pain: official journal of the American Pain Society 02/2011; 12(2):228-35. · 3.78 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined predictors of treatment expectation among osteoarthritis (OA) patients in a multisite clinical trial of pain coping skills training (CST).
Patients (N=171) completed a pretreatment assessment battery that asked questions about treatment expectations, pain coping variables, pain, physical function, psychological distress, quality of life, and depression as well as background demographic and medical variables.
Regression analyses indicated that several variables accounted for 21% of the variance in treatment expectations (P<0.0001). Patients who were classified as adaptive copers, reported higher self-efficacy and social interaction, had higher quality of life, and who had lower levels of affective distress and depression had more positive expectations about engaging in pain CST. Variables that were not associated with treatment expectation were level of pain and physical dysfunction, duration of disease, and disability status as well as demographic variables.
Although many OA patients will approach pain CST with positive expectations, others have lower expectations. This study suggests that a multidimensional assessment of OA patients with chronic pain can identify those who have higher expectations versus lower expectations. The results suggest that patients who are psychologically distressed are less optimistic about engaging in treatment and that these patients, in particular, may benefit from and need pretreatment motivational interviewing to enhance their uptake of pain coping skills.
The Clinical journal of pain 12/2010; 27(4):315-22. · 3.01 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined the impact of different reporting period lengths on the accuracy of items measuring interference due to pain and fatigue with work, walking, and relations with others.
Six items from well-established instruments (Brief Pain Inventory, Brief Fatigue Inventory, SF-36) were investigated in a prospective study of 117 patients with chronic rheumatological illness. Daily ratings were compared with recall ratings of 1, 3, 7, and 28-day reporting periods.
The level of recall ratings (RRs) for reporting periods of 3 days or more were significantly higher than the level of aggregated end-of-day (EOD) ratings. Correspondence between aggregated EOD and RRs was good (r ≥ .80) regardless of the length of the reporting period. Ratings of interference for a single day were highly correlated with aggregated EOD for up to 14 days prior to the single rating (r ≥ .76).
Recall ratings with reporting periods of up to a month yield good correspondence with aggregated daily ratings, although the absolute level of the rating will be inflated for recall periods of 3 days or longer.
Quality of Life Research 10/2010; 19(8):1163-70. · 2.41 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This meta-analysis examined whether effects of psychosocial interventions on psychological distress in cancer patients are conditional upon pre-intervention distress levels. Published articles and unpublished dissertations between 1980 and 2005 were searched for interventions reporting the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) or the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Multilevel mixed-effects modeling was used to meta-analyze effect-sizes separately for the HADS (27 trials, 2,424 patients) and STAI (34 trials, 2,029 patients). Pre-intervention distress significantly moderated intervention effects, explaining up to 50% of the between-study effect-size variance: effects on anxiety and depression were generally negligible when pre-intervention distress was low and pronounced when it was high. These results could not be explained by differences in intervention type, setting, dose, and whether intervention was targeted at distressed patients. Psychosocial interventions may be most beneficial for cancer patients with elevated distress. Future research should identify which treatment components are most effective for these patients to facilitate optimal treatment tailoring and cost-effective health care.
Journal of Behavioral Medicine 09/2009; 33(1):1-14. · 3.10 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There are conflicting views regarding whether gray literature, including unpublished doctoral dissertations, should be included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Although publication status frequently is used as a proxy for study quality, some research suggests that dissertations are often of superior quality to published studies.
We examined 107 projects involving doctoral dissertations (42 published, 65 unpublished) that studied psychosocial interventions for cancer patients.
Published dissertations were more likely to be supported by research funding but were not more likely than unpublished dissertations to examine specific types of interventions. Across several indices of methodological quality there were minimal differences. Dissertations with significant findings tended to be more likely to be published than those without significant findings.
Unpublished dissertations focusing on psychosocial interventions for cancer patients are not necessarily of vastly inferior quality to those that eventually are published. Because doctoral dissertations are easy to access relative to other forms of gray literature, are free from some types of bias, and are reported thoroughly, they merit inclusion in comprehensive literature reviews.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The considerable amount of research examining psychosocial interventions for cancer patients makes it important to examine its scope and methodological quality. This comprehensive overview characterizes the field with as few exclusions as possible. A systematic search strategy identified 673 reports comprising 488 unique projects conducted over a 25 year time span. Although the literature on this topic has grown over time, the research was predominantly conducted in the United States (57.0%), largely with breast cancer patients (included in 70.5% of the studies). The intervention approach used most frequently was cognitive behavioral (32.4%), the treatment goal was often improving quality of life generally (69.5%), and the professionals delivering the interventions were typically nurses (29.1%) or psychologists (22.7%). Overall, there was some discrepancy between the types of interventions studied and the types of supportive services available to and sought by cancer patients. Strengths of this research include using randomized designs (62.9%), testing for baseline group equivalence (84.5%), and monitoring treatment, which rose significantly from being used in 48.1-64.4% of projects over time. However, deficiencies in such areas as examining treatment mechanisms and the adequacy of reporting of methodology, essential for useful syntheses of research on these interventions, remain to be addressed. Methodological challenges related to the complexity of this applied research, such as participants seeking treatment outside of research, contamination, and reactions to randomization, also were apparent. Future research could benefit from closer interactions between academic and voluntary sectors and expanding the diversity of participants.
Cancer treatment reviews 04/2009; 35(5):475-84. · 5.30 Impact Factor