Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/24046
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRoydhouse, Jessica K.-
dc.contributor.authorCohen, Matthew L.-
dc.contributor.authorEshoj, Henrik R.-
dc.contributor.authorCorsini, Nadia-
dc.contributor.authorYucel, Emre-
dc.contributor.authorRutherford, Claudia-
dc.contributor.authorWac, Katarzyna-
dc.contributor.authorBerrocal, Allan-
dc.contributor.authorLanzi, Alyssa-
dc.contributor.authorNowinski, Cindy-
dc.contributor.authorRoberts, Natasha-
dc.contributor.authorKassianos, Angelos P.-
dc.contributor.authorSebille, Veronique-
dc.contributor.authorKing, Madeleine T.-
dc.contributor.authorMercieca-Bebber, Rebecca-
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-14T10:11:59Z-
dc.date.available2022-02-14T10:11:59Z-
dc.date.issued2021-01-01-
dc.identifier.citationQuality of Life Research, 2021en_US
dc.identifier.issn09629343-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/24046-
dc.description.abstractAims: Proxy reports are often used when patients are unable to self-report. It is unclear how proxy measures are currently in use in adult health care and research settings. We aimed to describe how proxy reports are used in these settings, including the use of measures developed specifically for proxy reporting in adult health populations. Methods: We systematically searched Medline, PsycINFO, PsycTESTS, CINAHL and EMBASE from database inception to February 2018. Search terms included a combination of terms for quality of life and health outcomes, proxy-reporters, and health condition terms. The data extracted included clinical context, the name of the proxy measure(s) used and other descriptive data. We determined whether the measures were developed specifically for proxy use or were existing measures adapted for proxy use. Results: The database search identified 17,677 possible articles, from which 14,098 abstracts were reviewed. Of these, 11,763 were excluded and 2335 articles were reviewed in full, with 880 included for data extraction. The most common clinical settings were dementia (30%), geriatrics (15%) and cancer (13%). A majority of articles (51%) were paired studies with proxy and patient responses for the same person on the same measure. Most paired studies (77%) were concordance studies comparing patient and proxy responses on these measures. Discussion: Most published research using proxies has focused on proxy-patient concordance. Relatively few measures used in research with proxies were specifically developed for proxy use. Future work is needed to examine the performance of measures specifically developed for proxies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO No. CRD42018103179en_US
dc.formatpdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofQuality of Life Researchen_US
dc.rights© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectProxy measuresen_US
dc.subjectProxy-reported outcomesen_US
dc.subjectOutcome measuresen_US
dc.subjectQuality of lifeen_US
dc.subjectSystematic reviewen_US
dc.titleThe use of proxies and proxy-reported measures: a report of the international society for quality of life research (ISOQOL) proxy task forceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Tasmaniaen_US
dc.collaborationBrown Universityen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Delawareen_US
dc.collaborationOdense University Hospitalen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of South Australiaen_US
dc.collaborationAmgen, Global Health Economicsen_US
dc.collaborationBristol Myers Squibben_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Sydneyen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Genevaen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Copenhagenen_US
dc.collaborationNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicineen_US
dc.collaborationRoyal Brisbane and Women’s Hospitalen_US
dc.collaborationQueensland University of Technologyen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity College Londonen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Nantesen_US
dc.subject.categoryPsychologyen_US
dc.journalsSubscriptionen_US
dc.countryAustraliaen_US
dc.countryUnited Statesen_US
dc.countryDenmarken_US
dc.countrySwitzerlanden_US
dc.countryUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.countryFranceen_US
dc.subject.fieldSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11136-021-02937-8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid34254262-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85110585657-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85110585657-
cut.common.academicyear2020-2021en_US
item.openairetypearticle-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.grantfulltextnone-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Nursing-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Health Sciences-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0001-6428-2623-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Health Sciences-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations 20

11
checked on Aug 23, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

10
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Oct 29, 2023

Page view(s)

220
Last Week
0
Last month
7
checked on Aug 30, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons