Development and content validation of a symptom assessment for eosinophilic gastritis and eosinophilic gastroenteritis in adults and adolescents.
Eosinophilic duodenitis
Eosinophilic gastritis
Eosinophilic gastroenteritis
Patient reported outcomes
Journal
Orphanet journal of rare diseases
ISSN: 1750-1172
Titre abrégé: Orphanet J Rare Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101266602
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 11 2021
24 11 2021
Historique:
received:
13
08
2021
accepted:
06
11
2021
entrez:
25
11
2021
pubmed:
26
11
2021
medline:
12
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A patient reported outcome (PRO) instrument with evidence of validity and reliability for assessing symptoms of eosinophilic gastritis (EG) and eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE) is needed to measure treatment benefit in clinical trials. The aim of this research is to develop an EG/EGE symptom PRO instrument for patients aged 12 and above. The Symptom Assessment for Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Diseases (SAGED) was developed through a literature review, discussions with expert clinicians, and concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews with patients. Patients (n = 28) were recruited based on confirmed diagnosis and self-reported symptoms. The final instrument was translated and linguistically validated with additional cognitive debriefing interviews (n = 105). SAGED is a 24-h recall questionnaire consisting of eight items evaluating the core symptoms of EG and EGE (abdominal pain, nausea, bloating, early satiety, loss of appetite, vomiting, and diarrhea). Seven of the eight items are evaluated on an 11-point numerical rating scale ranging from 'none' to 'worst imaginable'. Cognitive debriefing interviews showed that adults and adolescents understand the content and are able to select a response that reflects their experience. The linguistic validation process produced 21 translations that are understandable to patients and conceptually equivalent to the source version. SAGED is suitable for measuring symptom improvement in adult and adolescent patients with EG and/or EGE. The content validity of SAGED has been established through best practices in qualitative research for PRO instrument development. The psychometric properties of SAGED will be evaluated in a future study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A patient reported outcome (PRO) instrument with evidence of validity and reliability for assessing symptoms of eosinophilic gastritis (EG) and eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EGE) is needed to measure treatment benefit in clinical trials. The aim of this research is to develop an EG/EGE symptom PRO instrument for patients aged 12 and above.
METHODS
The Symptom Assessment for Gastrointestinal Eosinophilic Diseases (SAGED) was developed through a literature review, discussions with expert clinicians, and concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews with patients. Patients (n = 28) were recruited based on confirmed diagnosis and self-reported symptoms. The final instrument was translated and linguistically validated with additional cognitive debriefing interviews (n = 105).
RESULTS
SAGED is a 24-h recall questionnaire consisting of eight items evaluating the core symptoms of EG and EGE (abdominal pain, nausea, bloating, early satiety, loss of appetite, vomiting, and diarrhea). Seven of the eight items are evaluated on an 11-point numerical rating scale ranging from 'none' to 'worst imaginable'. Cognitive debriefing interviews showed that adults and adolescents understand the content and are able to select a response that reflects their experience. The linguistic validation process produced 21 translations that are understandable to patients and conceptually equivalent to the source version.
CONCLUSIONS
SAGED is suitable for measuring symptom improvement in adult and adolescent patients with EG and/or EGE. The content validity of SAGED has been established through best practices in qualitative research for PRO instrument development. The psychometric properties of SAGED will be evaluated in a future study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34819137
doi: 10.1186/s13023-021-02107-6
pii: 10.1186/s13023-021-02107-6
pmc: PMC8611867
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
495Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018 Aug;121(2):162-167
pubmed: 29940308
Medicine (Baltimore). 1970 Jul;49(4):299-319
pubmed: 5426746
Clin Ther. 2017 Nov;39(11):2216-2229
pubmed: 29055500
Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2015 Mar 26;6:e82
pubmed: 25809314
Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2014 Jun;43(2):317-27
pubmed: 24813518
Dig Dis Sci. 2016 Sep;61(9):2585-92
pubmed: 27234270
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):967-77
pubmed: 22152165
Ann Nutr Metab. 2018;73 Suppl 4:18-28
pubmed: 30783041
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Jul;10(7):742-749.e1
pubmed: 22475741
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 May;9(5):2050-2059.e20
pubmed: 33440255
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Apr;3(4):271-280
pubmed: 29533199
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):978-88
pubmed: 22152166
Am J Gastroenterol. 2019 Jun;114(6):984-994
pubmed: 31008735
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2015 Sep;15(9):58
pubmed: 26233430
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1075-83
pubmed: 19804437
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004 Jan;113(1):11-28; quiz 29
pubmed: 14713902
Gastroenterology. 2019 Jul;157(1):74-86.e15
pubmed: 30922997
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Jun;31(6):1111-9
pubmed: 26699695
Dig Dis Sci. 2018 May;63(5):1148-1157
pubmed: 29476289
Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Aug;109(8):1277-85
pubmed: 24957155
Dig Liver Dis. 2015 Mar;47(3):197-201
pubmed: 25547198
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2018 Sep;67(3):318-321
pubmed: 29851758
Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104
pubmed: 15804318
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2015 Jul;61(1):56-64
pubmed: 25699593
Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2016 Apr;50(2):175-88
pubmed: 26054822
Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2014 Jun;43(2):257-68
pubmed: 24813514
World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. 2016 Nov 6;7(4):513-523
pubmed: 27867684
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2016 Jan;62(1):36-42
pubmed: 25988554
Qual Life Res. 2009 Nov;18(9):1263-78
pubmed: 19784865