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

Cynthia S Hofman, Jennifer E Lutomski, Han Boter, Bianca M Buurman, Anton J M de Craen, Rogier Donders, Marcel G M Olde Rikkert, Peter Makai, René J F Melis and Research Consortium Topics-Mds

PLOS ONE, 2017, vol. 12, issue 3, 1-12

Abstract: 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.

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173081 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 73081&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0173081

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173081

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().