Abstract

PurposeThe Working Group undertook a critical, comprehensive synthesis of the response shift work to date. We aimed to (1) describe the rationale for this initiative; (2) outline how the Working Group operated; (3) summarize the papers that comprise this initiative; and (4) discuss the way forward.MethodsFour interdisciplinary teams, consisting of response shift experts, external experts, and new investigators, prepared papers on (1) definitions and theoretical underpinnings, (2) operationalizations and response shift methods, (3) implications for healthcare decision-making, and (4) on the published magnitudes of response shift effects. Draft documents were discussed during a two-day meeting. Papers were reviewed by all members.ResultsVanier and colleagues revised the formal definition and theory of response shift, and applied these in an amended, explanatory model of response shift. Sébille and colleagues conducted a critical examination of eleven response shift methods and concluded that for each method extra steps are required to make the response shift interpretation plausible. Sawatzky and colleagues created a framework for considering the impact of response shift on healthcare decision-making at the level of the individual patient (micro), the organization (meso), and policy (macro). Sajobi and colleagues are conducting a meta-analysis of published response shift effects. Preliminary findings indicate that the mean effect sizes are often small and variable across studies that measure different outcomes and use different methods.ConclusionFuture response shift research will benefit from collaboration among diverse people, formulating alternative hypotheses of response shift, and conducting the most conclusive studies aimed at testing these (falsification).

Highlights

  • 10 UMR INSERM 1246, SPHERE “methodS in Patient-Centered Outcomes and HEalth ResEarch”, University of Nantes, University of Tours, Nantes, France

  • Breetvelt and Van Dam [1] noticed the recurrent finding that patients with cancer or other diseases did not report a lower level of quality of life (QoL) and happiness, or more anxiety and depression than healthy individuals, despite physical malaise, and contrary to the expectations of their healthcare providers

  • Based on the definitions provided by Howard and colleagues [2] in the area of educational interventions and Golembiewski et al [5] in the field of organizational change, Sprangers and Schwartz [6] proposed that response shift refers to a change in the meaning of one’s self-evaluation of a target construct as a result of: (a) a change in the respondent’s internal standards; (b) a change in the respondent’s values; or (c) a redefinition of the target construct

Read more

Summary

COMMEN TA R Y

Response shift in results of patient‐reported outcome measures: a commentary to The Response Shift—in Sync Working Group initiative. Oort9 · Véronique Sébille10 · The Response Shift—in Sync Working Group

Quality of Life Research
New investigators
Overview of papers
Curious scrutiny
Findings
Compliance with ethical standards
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call