Evaluation of the Content Validity and Cross-Cultural Validity of the Study Participant Feedback Questionnaire (SPFQ).
Clinical trial feedback
Cross-cultural validity
Patient experience
Qualitative research
SPFQ
Journal
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
ISSN: 2168-4804
Titre abrégé: Ther Innov Regul Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101597411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2020
11 2020
Historique:
received:
07
03
2020
accepted:
03
06
2020
pubmed:
22
7
2020
medline:
4
6
2021
entrez:
22
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Study Participant Feedback Questionnaire (SPFQ) is a patient-completed tool designed to assess patient experiences and satisfaction with aspects associated with being involved in a clinical trial. Originally developed in oncology and among English-speaking participants, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the content and cross-cultural validity of the SPFQ in other indications and non-English-speaking countries. Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews were conducted with 80 participants across eight non-English-speaking countries (in Europe, South America and Asia) who had received an investigational medicinal product as part of a clinical trial in the past three years. Interviews comprised concept elicitation to identify concepts of importance to participants' trial experiences, and cognitive debriefing to assess understanding and perceived importance of SPFQ instructions, items and response options. Concept elicitation findings supported the content validity of the SPFQ. During cognitive debriefing, SPFQ instructions and the majority of items were well understood by participants. Participants generally considered the SPFQ items important to their clinical trial experience, albeit a handful of items assessed concepts that had not been experienced by trial participants or were redundant with other SPFQ items. The instructions, response options and recall period of the SPFQ were generally well understood. No country-level differences in understanding or importance were apparent. Study findings provide evidence for the content and cross-cultural validity of the SPFQ and support implementation of the SPFQ as a means of obtaining participant feedback across global development programmes in a variety of indications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32691362
doi: 10.1007/s43441-020-00179-3
pii: 10.1007/s43441-020-00179-3
pmc: PMC7704515
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1522-1533Références
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1993 Feb;35(2):204-7
pubmed: 8443040
JAMA Netw Open. 2018 Oct 5;1(6):e182969
pubmed: 30646218
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89
pubmed: 24568690
Trials. 2010 Jan 11;11:2
pubmed: 20064225
J Cancer Educ. 2006 Winter;21(4):237-42
pubmed: 17542716
Qual Life Res. 2015 May;24(5):1033-41
pubmed: 25560774
Trials. 2009 Jul 10;10:52
pubmed: 19591685
Value Health. 2017 Mar;20(3):481-486
pubmed: 28292494
Value Health. 2014 Nov;17(7):A649
pubmed: 27202341
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2017 Sep;51(5):542-550
pubmed: 30231690
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1075-83
pubmed: 19804437
Qual Life Res. 2010 Oct;19(8):1087-96
pubmed: 20512662
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 20;7(3):e015276
pubmed: 28320800
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb 27;17(1):166
pubmed: 28241758
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 Apr 27;10:631-40
pubmed: 27175063
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2018 Oct 04;13:44-49
pubmed: 30345398
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020 Nov;54(6):1489-1500
pubmed: 32617912
Trials. 2016 Oct 6;17(1):483
pubmed: 27716378
Qual Life Res. 2015 May;24(5):1069-76
pubmed: 25194573
Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):471-5
pubmed: 24969009