Development of a breast reconstruction satisfaction questionnaire (BRECON‐31): Principal components analysis and clinimetric properties

Temple‐Oberle, Claire; Cook, E. Francis; Bettger‐Hahn, Margo; Mychailyshyn, Nadia; Naeem, Hina; MacDermid, Joy C.

doi:10.1002/jso.23114

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Statistical techniques from classical test theory (CTT), such as principal components analysis (PCA), continue to be widely used in the initial stages of instrument testing to examine patterns of correlations among items and identify interrelated item subsets (empirical factors) [7,8]. Following the application of such methods, each identified empirical factor is assigned a descriptive label to indicate the traits it is hypothesised to measure (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Theoretical and empirical dimensions of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire: a cross sectional survey and principal component analysis

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo develop patient-reported outcome instruments, statistical techniques (e.g., principal components analysis; PCA) are used to examine correlations among items and identify interrelated item subsets (empirical factors). However, interpretation and labelling of empirical factors is a subjective process, lacking precision or conceptual basis. We report a novel and reproducible method for mapping between theoretical and empirical factor structures. We illustrate the method using the pilot Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire (AGQ), a new measure of glaucoma-related disability developed using the International Classification of Functioning and Disability (ICF) as a theoretical framework and tested in a sample representing the spectrum of glaucoma severity.MethodsWe used the ICF to code AGQ item content before mailing the AGQ to a UK sample (N = 1349) selected to represent people with a risk factor for glaucoma and people with glaucoma across a range of severity. Reflecting uncertainty in the theoretical framework (items with multiple ICF codes), an exploratory PCA was conducted. The theoretical structure informed our interpretation of the empirical structure and guided the selection of theoretically-derived factor labels. We also explored the discrimination of the AGQ across glaucoma severity groups.Results656 (49%) completed questionnaires were returned. The data yielded a 7-factor solution with a simple structure (using cut-off point of a loading of 0.5) that together accounted for 63% of variance in the scores. The mapping process resulted in allocation of the following theoretically-derived factor labels: 1) Seeing Functions: Participation; 2) Moving Around & Communication; 3) Emotional Functions; 4) Walking Around Obstacles; 5) Light; 6) Seeing Functions: Domestic & Social Life; 7) Mobility. Using the seven factor scores as independent variables in a discriminant function analysis, the AGQ scores resulted in correct glaucoma severity grading of 32.5% of participants (p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis paper addresses a methodological gap in the application of classical test theory (CTT) techniques, such as PCA, in instrument development. Labels for empirically-derived factors are often selected intuitively whereas they can inform existing bodies of knowledge if selected on the basis of theoretical construct labels, which are more explicitly defined and which relate to each other in ways that are evidence based.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following the application of such methods, each identified empirical factor is assigned a descriptive label to indicate the traits it is hypothesised to measure (e.g. near and distance vision) [7]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical and empirical dimensions of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire: a cross sectional survey and principal component analysis

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their role does not need to be limited to research, as surgeons may find great utility in their use in evaluation of their own practices, as evidenced by a recent publication from New Zealand. [128][129][130] Given the amount of investment required for the creation of such reliable tools, however, recuperation of costs and licensing fees will also need to be considered. Current research into the development of generic measures with modern conceptual methods is also currently underway.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Reconstructive Breast Surgery

Korus

Cypel

Zhong

et al. 2015

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the six identified PROM instruments, only three, BREAST-Q, [19][20][21] BRECON-31 [22][23][24] and EORTC QLQ-BRECON-23 [25][26][27] were considered to have adequate content validity (see below). Of the remainder, the Michigan BR Outcome Study (MBROS) group developed a BRspecific questionnaire item set for satisfaction (MBROS-S) 28 and body image (MBROS-BI), 29 using input from an expert panel alone.…”

Section: Prom Instruments Selection For Full Cosmin Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Post-mastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Development and Measurement Properties

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Breast reconstruction (BR) is performed to improve outcomes for patients undergoing mastectomy. A recently developed core outcome set for BR includes six patient-reported outcomes that should be measured and reported in all future studies. It is vital that any instrument used to measure these outcomes as part of a core measurement set be robustly developed and validated so data are reliable and accurate. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the development and measurement properties of existing BR patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to inform instrument selection for future studies. Methods. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review of development and validation studies of BR PROMs was conducted to assess their measurement properties. PROMs with adequate content validity were assessed using three steps: (1) the methodological quality of each identified study was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist; (2) criteria were applied for assessing good measurement properties; and (3) evidence was summarized and the quality of evidence assessed using a modified GRADE approach. Results. Fourteen articles reported the development and measurement properties of six PROMs. Of these, only three (BREAST-Q, BRECON-31, and EORTC QLQ-BRECON-23) were considered to have adequate content validity and proceeded to full evaluation. This showed that all three PROMs had been robustly developed and validated and demonstrated adequate quality. Conclusions. BREAST-Q, BRECON-31, and EORTC QLQ-BRECON-23 have been well-developed and demonstrate adequate measurement properties. Work with key stakeholders is now needed to generate consensus regarding which PROM should be recommended for inclusion in a core measurement set.

show abstract

Development of a breast reconstruction satisfaction questionnaire (BRECON‐31): Principal components analysis and clinimetric properties

Abstract: A reliable, valid 31-item breast reconstruction satisfaction questionnaire was developed.

Cited by 19 publications

References 20 publications

Theoretical and empirical dimensions of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire: a cross sectional survey and principal component analysis

Theoretical and empirical dimensions of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire: a cross sectional survey and principal component analysis

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Reconstructive Breast Surgery

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Post-mastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Development and Measurement Properties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About