↓ Skip to main content

Agreement between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hip and knee replacement patients

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Agreement between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hip and knee replacement patients
Published in
Quality of Life Research, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11136-018-1823-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Esther Kwong, Jenny Neuburger, Nick Black

Abstract

To investigate the relationship between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and the influence on this relationship of patients' age and socio-economic status and the length of time. Patients undergoing hip or knee replacement in four hospitals who had completed a pre-operative questionnaire were invited to recall their pre-operative health status shortly after surgery. The questionnaires included a disease-specific (Oxford Hip Score; Oxford Knee Score) and generic (EQ-5D-3L) PROM. Consistency and absolute agreement between contemporary and retrospective reports were investigated using intraclass correlations (ICCs). Differences were visualised using Bland-Altman plots. Linear regression analysis explored whether retrospective can predict contemporary PROMs. Patients' recalled health statuses were similar to their contemporaneous reports, with no significant systematic bias. Absolute agreement for disease-specific PROMs was very strong (ICC 0.82) and stronger than for the generic PROM (ICC 0.60, 0.62). Agreement was consistently strong across the range of severity of a patient's condition, age and socio-economic status. Patients' age and socio-economic status had no significant influence on size of difference and direction of recall, although reliability of recall was slightly worse among the over-75s versus under-60s for hips (Oxford Hip Score ICC 0.88 vs. 0.78). Mean retrospective PROMs for groups or populations of patients can reliably predict what mean contemporary reports of PROMs would have been. Retrospective PROMs can be used to obtain a baseline assessment of health status when contemporary collection is not feasible or cost effective. Research is needed to determine the feasibility of retrospective PROMs in emergency admissions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,214,232
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#276
of 2,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,952
of 330,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#13
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,916 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.