Cited by 107Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth Education and ValidationSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Seeking the Patient's Perspective: A Qualitative Assessment of EuroQol, COOP-WONCA Charts and MYMOP

Paterson, Charlotte·2004·Quality of Life Research

Abstract

An outcome questionnaire that is patient-centred should encompass the aims, values and treatment effects that are prioritised by individuals, and should enable each individual to provide an unambiguous assessment of change over time. There is little evidence about how well outcome questionnaires perform in this regard. This paper describes how interviews that combined in-depth enquiry and cognitive techniques were used to explore patients' experiences of completing three outcome questionnaires over a 6 month period. The 23 interviewees all had chronic disease and were receiving acupuncture treatment for the first time. Many of the problems uncovered by this study can be ameliorated by attention to questionnaire design. For example, by the provision of at least five response options, by being explicit about including co-morbidity, and by measuring medication change as a separate outcome. The study also highlighted more fundamental conceptual difficulties, such as response shift and the respondent's conflict between scoring external function and internal distress (what they did, vs. what they felt). These issues relate to the co-existence of different perspectives and the impossibility of reducing health status to one 'single truth'. The study concludes that qualitative evaluations have an important role to play in questionnaire design and development and are likely to lead to more modest and realistic appraisals of outcome questionnaire performance.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/b:qure.0000025586.51955.78

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 33 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Paterson C. The context, experience and outcome of acupuncture treatment: Users' perspectives and outcome questionnaire performance (dissertation). University of London, 2002.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Paterson, C.
Affiliations
University of Bristol (GB)
Corresponding author
Paterson, Charlotte
Venue
Quality of Life Research
Published
2004-06
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
871-881
ISSN
  • 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2649
OpenAlex
W1992498035
Cited by
107
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
15.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Quality of Life Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
questionnaire design, EuroQol, COOP/WONCA charts, chronic disease, acupuncture, response shift, patient experience, health status measurement, comorbidities, medication changes, cognitive interviewing
MeSH terms
Chronic Disease, United Kingdom, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, State Medicine, Patient Satisfaction, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Acupuncture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review