Advantages and psychometric validation of proximal intensive assessments of patient-reported outcomes collected in daily life
- 384 Downloads
Ambulatory assessment data collection methods are increasingly used to study behavior, experiences, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as emotions, cognitions, and symptoms in clinical samples. Data collected close in time at frequent and fixed intervals can assess PROs that are discrete or changing rapidly and provide information about temporal dynamics or mechanisms of change in clinical samples and individuals, but clinical researchers have not yet routinely and systematically investigated the reliability and validity of such measures or their potential added value over conventional measures. The present study provides a comprehensive, systematic evaluation of the psychometrics of several proximal intensive assessment (PIA) measures in a clinical sample and investigates whether PIA appears to assess meaningful differences in phenomena over time.
Data were collected on a variety of psychopathology constructs on handheld devices every 4 h for 7 days from 62 adults recently exposed to traumatic injury of themselves or a family member. Data were also collected on standard self-report measures of the same constructs at the time of enrollment, 1 week after enrollment, and 2 months after injury.
For all measure scores, results showed good internal consistency across items and within persons over time, provided evidence of convergent, divergent, and construct validity, and showed significant between- and within-subject variability.
Results indicate that PIA measures can provide valid measurement of psychopathology in a clinical sample. PIA may be useful to study mechanisms of change in clinical contexts, identify targets for change, and gauge treatment progress.
KeywordsExperience sampling method Ecological momentary assessment Intensive longitudinal data Ambulatory assessment Traumatic stress Patient-reported outcomes
We wish to thank Abbey Tillery, Marianne Kabour, Rob Wheeler, Donn Garvert, Luma Muhtadie, and Janet Neff for their work on the research and all of the research participants who generously contributed their time and effort to benefit others. We thank John Nezlek for his comments and suggestions for statistical analyses. The contents do not represent the views of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government.
This study was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (MH69876).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare they have no conflict of interest. There are no commercial products associated with this research.
All aspects of the conduct of this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the VA Palo Alto Healthcare System and the Stanford University Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
- 1.Schwarz, N. (2012). Why researchers should think “real-time”: A cognitive rationale. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Conner (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 22–42). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 2.Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L. (2000). Event-sampling and other methods for studying everyday experience. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for social and personality psychology (pp. 190–222). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- 3.Nezlek, J. B. (2012). Diary methods for personality and social psychology. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
- 5.Shrout, P. E., & Lane, S. P. (2012). Psychometrics. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Conner (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 302–320). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- 7.Nezlek, J. B., Sorrentino, R. M., Yasunaga, S., Otsubo, Y., Allen, M., Kouhara, S., & Shuper, P. (2008). Cross-cultural differences in reactions to daily events as indicators of cross-cultural differences in self-construction and affect. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 685–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Kimhy, D., Delespaul, P., Ahn, H., Cai, S., Shikhman, M., Lieberman, J. A., et al. (2010). Concurrent measurement of “real-world” stress and arousal in individuals with psychosis: Assessing the feasibility and validity of a novel methodology. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 36, 1131–1139.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 15.Stone, A. A., & Shiffman, S. (1994). Ecological momentary assessment in behavioral medicine. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 16, 199–202.Google Scholar
- 19.Kamarck, T. W., Shiffman, S., Muldoon, M. F., Sutton-Tyrrell, K., Gwaltney, C. J., Janicki, D. L., & Schwartz, J. E. (2007). Ecological momentary assessment as a resource for social epidemiology. In A. A. Stone, S. Shiffman, A. Atienza, & L. Nebeling (Eds.), The science of real-time data capture: Self-reports in health research (pp. 268–285). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 22.Carlson, E. B., Waelde, L., Palmieri, P. A., Smith, S. R., McDade-Montez, E., & Macia, K. (in press). Development and validation of the Dissociative Symptoms Scale. Assessment.Google Scholar
- 29.Feldman Barrett, E., & Barrett, D. J. (1999). Experience sampling program. Boston: Boston College.Google Scholar
- 31.Wichers, M. C., Myin-Germeys, I., Jacobs, N., Peeters, F., Kenis, G., Derom, C., et al. (2007). Evidence that moment-to-moment variation in positive emotions buffer genetic risk for depression: A momentary assessment twin study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 115, 451–457.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Nezlek, J. B. (2011). Mutilevel modeling for social and personality psychology. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
- 40.Kaniasty, K. (2005). Social support and traumatic stress. PTSD Research Quarterly, 16(2), 1–7.Google Scholar
- 42.Christianson, S. (Ed.). (1992). Handbook of emotion and memory: Research and theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 43.Myin-Germeys, I. (2012). Psychiatry. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Conner (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 636–650). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 44.Stone, A. A. (2007). Thoughts on the present state of real-time data capture. In A. A. Stone, S. Shiffman, A. Atienza, & L. Nebeling (Eds.), The science of real-time data capture: Self-reports in health research (pp. 361–370). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar