Examining the construct and known-group validity of a composite endpoint for The Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey Minimum Data Set (TOPICS-MDS); A large-scale data sharing initiative
Examining the construct and known-group validity of a composite endpoint for The Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey Minimum Data Set (TOPICS-MDS); A large-scale data sharing initiative
Samenvatting
Background Preference-weighted multi-faceted endpoints have the potential to facilitate comparative effectiveness research that incorporates patient preferences. The Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey—Composite endpoint (TOPICS-CEP) is potentially a valuable outcome measure for evaluating interventions in geriatric care as it combines multiple outcomes relevant to older persons in a single metric. The objective of this study was to validate TOPICS-CEP across different study settings (general population, primary care and hospital). Methods Data were extracted from TOPICS Minimum Dataset (MDS), a pooled public-access national database with information on older persons throughout the Netherlands. Data of 17,603 older persons were used. Meta-correlations were performed between TOPICS-CEP indexed scores, EuroQol5-D utility scores and Cantril’s ladder life satisfaction scores. Mixed linear regression analyses were performed to compare TOPICS-CEP indexed scores between known groups, e.g. persons with versus without depression. Results In the complete sample and when stratified by study setting TOPICS-CEP and Cantril’s ladder were moderately correlated, whereas TOPICS-CEP and EQ-5D were highly correlated. Higher mean TOPICS-CEP scores were found in persons who were: married, lived independently and had an education at university level. Moreover, higher mean TOPICS-CEP scores were found in persons without dementia, depression, and dizziness with falls, respectively. Similar results were found when stratified by subgroup. Conclusion This study supports that TOPICS-CEP is a robust measure which can potentially be used in broad settings to identify the effect of intervention or of prevention in elderly care.
Organisatie | Hogeschool van Amsterdam |
Gepubliceerd in | PLoS ONE Public Library of Science, Vol. 12, Uitgave: 3 |
Jaar | 2017 |
Type | Artikel |
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0173081 |
Taal | Engels |