↓ Skip to main content

Development of the Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Symptoms and Impact (PAH-SYMPACT®) questionnaire: a new patient-reported outcome instrument for PAH

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of the Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Symptoms and Impact (PAH-SYMPACT®) questionnaire: a new patient-reported outcome instrument for PAH
Published in
Respiratory Research, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12931-016-0388-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah McCollister, Shannon Shaffer, David B. Badesch, Arthur Filusch, Elke Hunsche, René Schüler, Ingela Wiklund, Andrew Peacock

Abstract

Regulators and clinical experts increasingly recognize the importance of incorporating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical studies of therapies for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). No PAH-specific instruments have been developed to date in accordance with the 2009 FDA guidance for the development of PROs as endpoints in clinical trials. A qualitative research study was conducted to develop a new instrument assessing PAH symptoms and their impacts following the FDA PRO guidance. A cross-sectional study was conducted at 5 centers in the US in symptomatic PAH patients aged 18-80 years. Concept elicitation was based on 5 focus group discussions, after which saturation of emergent concepts was reached. A PRO instrument for PAH symptoms and their impacts was drafted. To assess the appropriateness of items, instructions, response options, and recall periods, 2 rounds of one-on-one cognitive interviews were conducted, with instrument revisions following each round. Additional interviews tested the usability of an electronic version (ePRO). PRO development considered input from an international Steering Committee, and translatability and lexibility assessments. Focus groups comprised 25 patients (5 per group); 20 additional patients participated in cognitive interviews (10 per round); and 10 participated in usability interviews. Participants had a mean ± SD age of 53.1 ± 15.8 years, were predominantly female (93 %), and were diverse in race/ethnicity, WHO functional class (FC I/II: 56 %, III/IV: 44 %), and PAH etiology (idiopathic: 56 %, familial: 2 %, associated: 42 %). The draft PRO instrument (PAH-SYMPACT®) was found to be clear, comprehensive, and relevant to PAH patients in cognitive interviews. Items were organized in a draft conceptual framework with 16 symptom items in 4 domains (respiratory symptoms, tiredness, cardiovascular symptoms, other symptoms) and 25 impact items in 5 domains (physical activities, daily activities, social impact, cognition, emotional impact). The recall period is the past 24 h for symptoms, and the past 7 days for impacts. The PAH-SYMPACT® was shown to capture symptoms and their impacts relevant to PAH patients, demonstrating content saturation, concept validity, and ePRO usability. Final content and psychometric validation of the instrument will be based on the results of an ongoing Phase IIIb clinical trial in PAH patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 126 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 14%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 35 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 26%
Psychology 16 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 42 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#2,216
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,343
of 368,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#40
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 368,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.