| Title |
Validation of a treatment satisfaction questionnaire in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: assessing the change from intravenous to subcutaneous administration of rituximab
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s108489 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christina Theodore-Oklota, Louise Humphrey, Christof Wiesner, Gabriel Schnetzler, Stacie Hudgens, Alicyn Campbell |
| Abstract |
A subcutaneous (SC) formulation of rituximab (MabThera(®)/Rituxan(®)) has been developed that could reduce administration time and improve patient satisfaction with treatment. The Rituximab Administration Satisfaction Questionnaire (RASQ) was created to assess patients' perceptions and satisfaction with rituximab SC (RASQ-SC) or rituximab intravenous (RASQ-IV). We assessed the content validity and psychometric properties of RASQ in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Face and content validity of RASQ-SC and RASQ-IV were qualitatively assessed using 60-minute combined concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Psychometric validation of RASQ (item performance and reliability) was assessed quantitatively against the established Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire (CTSQ), using questionnaire data from the PrefMab (NCT01724021) and MabCute (NCT01461928) clinical studies. RASQ-IV demonstrated excellent coverage of concepts relevant to patients' (n=10) own treatment experiences and no new concepts were identified. Patients' expectations of rituximab SC were conceptually consistent with items included in the RASQ-SC, suggesting that the tool is also conceptually adequate. In 1,051 patients from PrefMab and MabCute, correlations with domains such as "RASQ: Physical Impacts" and "CTSQ: Feelings About Side Effects", "RASQ: Physical Impacts" and "CTSQ: Satisfaction With Therapy", and "RASQ: Satisfaction" and "CTSQ: Satisfaction With Therapy", achieved moderate-to-high correlations (>0.4) for convergent domains and <0.3 for divergent domains. This study supports the qualitative face and content validity and psychometric validity of RASQ-IV and RASQ-SC. Minor revisions were made to the questionnaires to enhance clarity and aid consistent reporting. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 28% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 17 January 2024.
All research outputs
#5,240,151
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#368
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,634
of 348,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#18
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 348,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.