Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The selection and use of outcome measures in pa...
View graph of relations

The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop. / Evans, Catherine J.; Benalia, Hamid; Preston, Nancy J. et al.
In: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, Vol. 46, No. 6, 12.2013, p. 925-937.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Evans, CJ, Benalia, H, Preston, NJ, Grande, G, Gysels, M, Short, V, Daveson, BA, Bausewein, C, Todd, C, Higginson, IJ & MORECare 2013, 'The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop', Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 925-937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010

APA

Evans, C. J., Benalia, H., Preston, N. J., Grande, G., Gysels, M., Short, V., Daveson, B. A., Bausewein, C., Todd, C., Higginson, I. J., & MORECare (2013). The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 46(6), 925-937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010

Vancouver

Evans CJ, Benalia H, Preston NJ, Grande G, Gysels M, Short V et al. The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 2013 Dec;46(6):925-937. Epub 2013 Apr 26. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010

Author

Evans, Catherine J. ; Benalia, Hamid ; Preston, Nancy J. et al. / The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research : the MORECare international consensus workshop. In: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 2013 ; Vol. 46, No. 6. pp. 925-937.

Bibtex

@article{7e2456d77cff47c6b13376b138a0632f,
title = "The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop",
abstract = "CONTEXT: A major barrier to widening and sustaining palliative care service provision is the requirement for better selection and use of outcome measures. Service commissioning is increasingly based on patient, carer, and service outcomes as opposed to service activity. OBJECTIVES: To generate recommendations and consensus for research in palliative and end-of-life care on the properties of the best outcome measures, enhancing the validity of proxy-reported data and optimal data collection time points.METHODS: An international expert {"}workshop{"} was convened and an online consensus survey was undertaken using the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation to generate recommendations and level of agreement. We focused on three areas: 1) measurement properties, 2) use of proxies, and 3) measurement timing. Data analysis comprised descriptive analysis of aggregate scores and collation of narrative comments. RESULTS: There were 31 workshop attendees; 29 recommendations were included in the online survey, completed by 28 experts. The top three recommendations by area were the following: 1) the properties of the best outcome measures are responsive to change over time and capture clinically important data, 2) to enhance the validity of proxy data requires clear and specific guidelines to aid lay individuals' and/or professionals' completion of proxy measures, and 3) data collection time points need clear identification to establish a baseline. CONCLUSION: Outcome measurement in palliative and end-of-life care requires the use of psychometrically robust measures that are clinically responsive, with defined data collection time points to establish a baseline and clear administration guidelines to complete proxy measures. To further the field requires clinical imperatives to more closely inform recommendations on outcome measurement.",
keywords = "Outcome assessment, evaluation studies, research design, palliative care, consensus",
author = "Evans, {Catherine J.} and Hamid Benalia and Preston, {Nancy J.} and Gunn Grande and Marjolein Gysels and Vicky Short and Daveson, {Barbara A.} and Claudia Bausewein and Chris Todd and Higginson, {Irene J.} and MORECare",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2013 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2013",
month = dec,
doi = "10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "925--937",
journal = "Journal of Pain and Symptom Management",
issn = "0885-3924",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research

T2 - the MORECare international consensus workshop

AU - Evans, Catherine J.

AU - Benalia, Hamid

AU - Preston, Nancy J.

AU - Grande, Gunn

AU - Gysels, Marjolein

AU - Short, Vicky

AU - Daveson, Barbara A.

AU - Bausewein, Claudia

AU - Todd, Chris

AU - Higginson, Irene J.

AU - MORECare

N1 - Copyright © 2013 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2013/12

Y1 - 2013/12

N2 - CONTEXT: A major barrier to widening and sustaining palliative care service provision is the requirement for better selection and use of outcome measures. Service commissioning is increasingly based on patient, carer, and service outcomes as opposed to service activity. OBJECTIVES: To generate recommendations and consensus for research in palliative and end-of-life care on the properties of the best outcome measures, enhancing the validity of proxy-reported data and optimal data collection time points.METHODS: An international expert "workshop" was convened and an online consensus survey was undertaken using the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation to generate recommendations and level of agreement. We focused on three areas: 1) measurement properties, 2) use of proxies, and 3) measurement timing. Data analysis comprised descriptive analysis of aggregate scores and collation of narrative comments. RESULTS: There were 31 workshop attendees; 29 recommendations were included in the online survey, completed by 28 experts. The top three recommendations by area were the following: 1) the properties of the best outcome measures are responsive to change over time and capture clinically important data, 2) to enhance the validity of proxy data requires clear and specific guidelines to aid lay individuals' and/or professionals' completion of proxy measures, and 3) data collection time points need clear identification to establish a baseline. CONCLUSION: Outcome measurement in palliative and end-of-life care requires the use of psychometrically robust measures that are clinically responsive, with defined data collection time points to establish a baseline and clear administration guidelines to complete proxy measures. To further the field requires clinical imperatives to more closely inform recommendations on outcome measurement.

AB - CONTEXT: A major barrier to widening and sustaining palliative care service provision is the requirement for better selection and use of outcome measures. Service commissioning is increasingly based on patient, carer, and service outcomes as opposed to service activity. OBJECTIVES: To generate recommendations and consensus for research in palliative and end-of-life care on the properties of the best outcome measures, enhancing the validity of proxy-reported data and optimal data collection time points.METHODS: An international expert "workshop" was convened and an online consensus survey was undertaken using the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation to generate recommendations and level of agreement. We focused on three areas: 1) measurement properties, 2) use of proxies, and 3) measurement timing. Data analysis comprised descriptive analysis of aggregate scores and collation of narrative comments. RESULTS: There were 31 workshop attendees; 29 recommendations were included in the online survey, completed by 28 experts. The top three recommendations by area were the following: 1) the properties of the best outcome measures are responsive to change over time and capture clinically important data, 2) to enhance the validity of proxy data requires clear and specific guidelines to aid lay individuals' and/or professionals' completion of proxy measures, and 3) data collection time points need clear identification to establish a baseline. CONCLUSION: Outcome measurement in palliative and end-of-life care requires the use of psychometrically robust measures that are clinically responsive, with defined data collection time points to establish a baseline and clear administration guidelines to complete proxy measures. To further the field requires clinical imperatives to more closely inform recommendations on outcome measurement.

KW - Outcome assessment

KW - evaluation studies

KW - research design

KW - palliative care

KW - consensus

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 23628515

VL - 46

SP - 925

EP - 937

JO - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

JF - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

SN - 0885-3924

IS - 6

ER -