Loading…
Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient‐reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi‐centered study
Background Existing patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown. Methods...
Saved in:
| Published in: | International forum of allergy & rhinology 2024-05, Vol.14 (5), p.898-908 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3480-1faaf7a418e4dfae89d145379294548e92147fae062a27973b44d4a0ed6e38be3 |
| container_end_page | 908 |
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 898 |
| container_title | International forum of allergy & rhinology |
| container_volume | 14 |
| creator | Sedaghat, Ahmad R. Derbarsegian, Armo Yu, Victor T. Alsayed, Ahmed Bitner, Benjamin F. Yeom, Brian Liu, David T. Schneider, Sven Adams, Sarah M. Houssein, Firas A. Walters, Zoe A. Tripathi, Siddhant Walker, Victoria L. Singerman, Kyle W. Meier, Josh C. Kim, Raymond Kuan, Edward C. Alsaleh, Saad Phillips, Katie M. |
| description | Background
Existing patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown.
Methods
This was a multi‐center, cross‐sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred.
Results
A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms’ current state was best reflected by a 1‐month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four‐ and five‐item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five‐item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four‐item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred.
Conclusion
Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1‐month period and use a four‐ or five‐item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/alr.23280 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2872808111</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2872808111</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3480-1faaf7a418e4dfae89d145379294548e92147fae062a27973b44d4a0ed6e38be3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFuFSEUhomxsU3bhS9gSNzo4rbAMAPj7qZRa3ITjdH1hDtzxtIwgBxGMzsfwYfxiXyScp3ahYlsIH--8xH4CXnK2QVnTFwaly5EJTR7RE4Ek2LTtFo-fjir5picI96ysmpe11w9IceVUlrzujkhvz6YbMFnGiFhhD7bb4A0eJqgN84dYhsGavxQEozBI9AQsy0Haj2N6_TvHz8TxJAyDDTMuQ8T0AkMzmWGjiHR_iYFb3uabqwPaP2MNlukuEwxh8nk4MKX5RXd-iLNkLw53GAcnWaXbbH3cIiLHfM8LGfkaDQO4fx-PyWf37z-dHW92b1_--5qu9v0ldRsw0djRmUk1yCH0YBuBy7rSrWilbXU0AouVclZI4xQrar2Ug7SMBgaqPQeqlPyYvXGFL7OgLmbLPbgnPEQZuyEVuXfNee8oM__QW_DXN7hsKuYlG2xM1molyvVp4CYYOxispNJS8dZd2izK212f9os7LN747yfYHgg_3ZXgMsV-G4dLP83ddvdx1V5B6UasFA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3044997304</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient‐reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi‐centered study</title><source>Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Sedaghat, Ahmad R. ; Derbarsegian, Armo ; Yu, Victor T. ; Alsayed, Ahmed ; Bitner, Benjamin F. ; Yeom, Brian ; Liu, David T. ; Schneider, Sven ; Adams, Sarah M. ; Houssein, Firas A. ; Walters, Zoe A. ; Tripathi, Siddhant ; Walker, Victoria L. ; Singerman, Kyle W. ; Meier, Josh C. ; Kim, Raymond ; Kuan, Edward C. ; Alsaleh, Saad ; Phillips, Katie M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sedaghat, Ahmad R. ; Derbarsegian, Armo ; Yu, Victor T. ; Alsayed, Ahmed ; Bitner, Benjamin F. ; Yeom, Brian ; Liu, David T. ; Schneider, Sven ; Adams, Sarah M. ; Houssein, Firas A. ; Walters, Zoe A. ; Tripathi, Siddhant ; Walker, Victoria L. ; Singerman, Kyle W. ; Meier, Josh C. ; Kim, Raymond ; Kuan, Edward C. ; Alsaleh, Saad ; Phillips, Katie M.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Existing patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown.
Methods
This was a multi‐center, cross‐sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred.
Results
A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms’ current state was best reflected by a 1‐month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four‐ and five‐item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five‐item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four‐item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred.
Conclusion
Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1‐month period and use a four‐ or five‐item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2042-6976</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2042-6984</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/alr.23280</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37788156</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Chronic Disease ; chronic rhinosinusitis ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; design ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Mental Recall ; Middle Aged ; Patient Reported Outcome Measures ; Patients ; patient‐reported outcome ; PROM ; recall ; response ; Rhinosinusitis ; Rhinosinusitis - diagnosis ; Rhinosinusitis - therapy ; scale ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2024-05, Vol.14 (5), p.898-908</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy and American Rhinologic Society.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy and American Rhinologic Society.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3480-1faaf7a418e4dfae89d145379294548e92147fae062a27973b44d4a0ed6e38be3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3475-0718 ; 0000-0002-1236-2098 ; 0000-0002-9869-8114 ; 0000-0001-6948-737X ; 0000-0001-6331-2325 ; 0000-0002-8792-231X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Falr.23280$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Falr.23280$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,27957,27958,50923,51032</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37788156$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sedaghat, Ahmad R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Derbarsegian, Armo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Victor T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alsayed, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bitner, Benjamin F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yeom, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, David T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Sven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adams, Sarah M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Houssein, Firas A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walters, Zoe A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tripathi, Siddhant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walker, Victoria L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singerman, Kyle W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meier, Josh C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Raymond</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuan, Edward C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alsaleh, Saad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Katie M.</creatorcontrib><title>Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient‐reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi‐centered study</title><title>International forum of allergy & rhinology</title><addtitle>Int Forum Allergy Rhinol</addtitle><description>Background
Existing patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown.
Methods
This was a multi‐center, cross‐sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred.
Results
A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms’ current state was best reflected by a 1‐month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four‐ and five‐item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five‐item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four‐item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred.
Conclusion
Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1‐month period and use a four‐ or five‐item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Chronic Disease</subject><subject>chronic rhinosinusitis</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>design</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mental Recall</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>patient‐reported outcome</subject><subject>PROM</subject><subject>recall</subject><subject>response</subject><subject>Rhinosinusitis</subject><subject>Rhinosinusitis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Rhinosinusitis - therapy</subject><subject>scale</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>2042-6976</issn><issn>2042-6984</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFuFSEUhomxsU3bhS9gSNzo4rbAMAPj7qZRa3ITjdH1hDtzxtIwgBxGMzsfwYfxiXyScp3ahYlsIH--8xH4CXnK2QVnTFwaly5EJTR7RE4Ek2LTtFo-fjir5picI96ysmpe11w9IceVUlrzujkhvz6YbMFnGiFhhD7bb4A0eJqgN84dYhsGavxQEozBI9AQsy0Haj2N6_TvHz8TxJAyDDTMuQ8T0AkMzmWGjiHR_iYFb3uabqwPaP2MNlukuEwxh8nk4MKX5RXd-iLNkLw53GAcnWaXbbH3cIiLHfM8LGfkaDQO4fx-PyWf37z-dHW92b1_--5qu9v0ldRsw0djRmUk1yCH0YBuBy7rSrWilbXU0AouVclZI4xQrar2Ug7SMBgaqPQeqlPyYvXGFL7OgLmbLPbgnPEQZuyEVuXfNee8oM__QW_DXN7hsKuYlG2xM1molyvVp4CYYOxispNJS8dZd2izK212f9os7LN747yfYHgg_3ZXgMsV-G4dLP83ddvdx1V5B6UasFA</recordid><startdate>202405</startdate><enddate>202405</enddate><creator>Sedaghat, Ahmad R.</creator><creator>Derbarsegian, Armo</creator><creator>Yu, Victor T.</creator><creator>Alsayed, Ahmed</creator><creator>Bitner, Benjamin F.</creator><creator>Yeom, Brian</creator><creator>Liu, David T.</creator><creator>Schneider, Sven</creator><creator>Adams, Sarah M.</creator><creator>Houssein, Firas A.</creator><creator>Walters, Zoe A.</creator><creator>Tripathi, Siddhant</creator><creator>Walker, Victoria L.</creator><creator>Singerman, Kyle W.</creator><creator>Meier, Josh C.</creator><creator>Kim, Raymond</creator><creator>Kuan, Edward C.</creator><creator>Alsaleh, Saad</creator><creator>Phillips, Katie M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3475-0718</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1236-2098</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9869-8114</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6948-737X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6331-2325</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8792-231X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202405</creationdate><title>Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient‐reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi‐centered study</title><author>Sedaghat, Ahmad R. ; Derbarsegian, Armo ; Yu, Victor T. ; Alsayed, Ahmed ; Bitner, Benjamin F. ; Yeom, Brian ; Liu, David T. ; Schneider, Sven ; Adams, Sarah M. ; Houssein, Firas A. ; Walters, Zoe A. ; Tripathi, Siddhant ; Walker, Victoria L. ; Singerman, Kyle W. ; Meier, Josh C. ; Kim, Raymond ; Kuan, Edward C. ; Alsaleh, Saad ; Phillips, Katie M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3480-1faaf7a418e4dfae89d145379294548e92147fae062a27973b44d4a0ed6e38be3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Chronic Disease</topic><topic>chronic rhinosinusitis</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>design</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mental Recall</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>patient‐reported outcome</topic><topic>PROM</topic><topic>recall</topic><topic>response</topic><topic>Rhinosinusitis</topic><topic>Rhinosinusitis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Rhinosinusitis - therapy</topic><topic>scale</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sedaghat, Ahmad R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Derbarsegian, Armo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Victor T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alsayed, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bitner, Benjamin F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yeom, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, David T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Sven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adams, Sarah M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Houssein, Firas A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walters, Zoe A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tripathi, Siddhant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walker, Victoria L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singerman, Kyle W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meier, Josh C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Raymond</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuan, Edward C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alsaleh, Saad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Katie M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International forum of allergy & rhinology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sedaghat, Ahmad R.</au><au>Derbarsegian, Armo</au><au>Yu, Victor T.</au><au>Alsayed, Ahmed</au><au>Bitner, Benjamin F.</au><au>Yeom, Brian</au><au>Liu, David T.</au><au>Schneider, Sven</au><au>Adams, Sarah M.</au><au>Houssein, Firas A.</au><au>Walters, Zoe A.</au><au>Tripathi, Siddhant</au><au>Walker, Victoria L.</au><au>Singerman, Kyle W.</au><au>Meier, Josh C.</au><au>Kim, Raymond</au><au>Kuan, Edward C.</au><au>Alsaleh, Saad</au><au>Phillips, Katie M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient‐reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi‐centered study</atitle><jtitle>International forum of allergy & rhinology</jtitle><addtitle>Int Forum Allergy Rhinol</addtitle><date>2024-05</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>898</spage><epage>908</epage><pages>898-908</pages><issn>2042-6976</issn><eissn>2042-6984</eissn><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>Background
Existing patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown.
Methods
This was a multi‐center, cross‐sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred.
Results
A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms’ current state was best reflected by a 1‐month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four‐ and five‐item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five‐item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four‐item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred.
Conclusion
Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1‐month period and use a four‐ or five‐item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>37788156</pmid><doi>10.1002/alr.23280</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3475-0718</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1236-2098</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9869-8114</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6948-737X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6331-2325</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8792-231X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2042-6976 |
| ispartof | International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2024-05, Vol.14 (5), p.898-908 |
| issn | 2042-6976 2042-6984 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2872808111 |
| source | Wiley Online Library |
| subjects | Adult Aged Chronic Disease chronic rhinosinusitis Cross-Sectional Studies design Female Humans Male Mental Recall Middle Aged Patient Reported Outcome Measures Patients patient‐reported outcome PROM recall response Rhinosinusitis Rhinosinusitis - diagnosis Rhinosinusitis - therapy scale Young Adult |
| title | Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient‐reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi‐centered study |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T23%3A20%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patient%20perspectives%20on%20recall%20period%20and%20response%20options%20in%20patient%E2%80%90reported%20outcome%20measures%20for%20chronic%20rhinosinusitis%20symptomatology:%20An%20international%20multi%E2%80%90centered%20study&rft.jtitle=International%20forum%20of%20allergy%20&%20rhinology&rft.au=Sedaghat,%20Ahmad%20R.&rft.date=2024-05&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=898&rft.epage=908&rft.pages=898-908&rft.issn=2042-6976&rft.eissn=2042-6984&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/alr.23280&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2872808111%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3480-1faaf7a418e4dfae89d145379294548e92147fae062a27973b44d4a0ed6e38be3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3044997304&rft_id=info:pmid/37788156&rfr_iscdi=true |