|Title||The Responsiveness, Content Validity, and Convergent Validity of the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) Patient-Reported Outcome Measure|
|Authors||Jolliffe, R., Seers, H., Jackson, S., Caro, E., Weeks, L. and Polley, M.J.|
Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) is a patient-centred questionnaire that allows cancer patients to identify and quantify the severity of their ‘Concerns’ and Wellbeing, as opposed to using a pre-determined list. MYCaW administration is brief and aids in prioritising treatment approaches. Our goal was to assess the convergent validity and responsiveness of MYCaW scores over time, the generalisability of the existing qualitative coding framework in different complementary and integrative healthcare settings and content validity.
Baseline and 6-week follow-up data (n=82) from MYCaW and FACIT-SpEx questionnaires were collected for a service evaluation of the ‘Living Well With The Impact of Cancer’ course at Penny Brohn Cancer Care. MYCaW construct validity was determined using Spearman's Rank Correlation test, and responsiveness indices assessed score changes over time. The existing qualitative coding framework was reviewed using a new dataset (n=158) and coverage of concern categories compared to items of existing outcome measures.
Good correlation between MYCaW and FACIT-SpEx score changes were achieved (r= -0.57, p≥0.01). MYCaW Profile and Concern scores were highly responsive to change: SRM=1.02 and 1.08; effect size=1.26 and 1.22. MYCaW change scores showed the anticipated gradient of change according to clinically relevant degrees of change. Categories including ‘Spirituality’, ‘weight change’ and ‘practical concerns’ were added to the coding framework to improve generalisability.
MYCaW scores were highly responsive to change, allowing personalized patient outcomes to be quantified; the qualitative coding framework is generalisable across different oncology settings and has broader coverage of patient-identified concerns compared with existing cancer-related patient-reported outcome measures.
|Keywords||PROM; cancer; complementary; integrative; oncology; validated|
|Journal||Integrative Cancer Therapies|
|Journal citation||14 (1), pp. 26-34|
|Accepted author manuscript||Validity and generalisability of MYCaW Jolliffe et al 2014.pdf|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI)||doi:10.1177/1534735414555809|