Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2009 guidance for industry on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures describes how the Agency evaluates the psychometric properties of measures intended to support medical product labeling claims. An important psychometric property is test–retest reliability. The guidance lists intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the assessment time period as key considerations for test–retest reliability evaluations. However, the guidance does not provide recommendations regarding ICC computation, nor is there consensus within the measurement literature regarding the most appropriate ICC formula for test–retest reliability assessment. This absence of consensus emerged as an issue within Critical Path Institute’s PRO Consortium. The purpose of this project was to generate thoughtful and informed recommendations regarding the most appropriate ICC formula for assessing a PRO measure’s test–retest reliability.
Literature was reviewed and a preferred ICC formula was proposed. Feedback on the chosen formula was solicited from psychometricians, biostatisticians, regulators, and other scientists who have collaborated on PRO Consortium initiatives.
Feedback was carefully considered and, after further deliberation, the proposed ICC formula was confirmed. In conclusion, to assess test–retest reliability for PRO measures, the two-way mixed-effect analysis of variance model with interaction for the absolute agreement between single scores is recommended.
Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Guidance for industry on patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Federal Register, 74(235), 65132–65133.
Weir, J. P. (2005). Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 19, 231–240. PubMed
Lee, K., Lee, J., Park, M., et al. (2012). Pitfalls and important issues in testing reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients in orthopaedic research. Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery [serial online], 4(2), 149–155. CrossRef
Sen, R., Yip, C., & Severson, K. (2017). The use of intra-class correlation coefficients to assess test-retest reliabilities in psychometric evaluations of patient reported outcome measures. Poster presented at: The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 20th Annual European Congress (November 8). Scotland: 2017; Glasgow.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428. CrossRef
McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 30–46. CrossRef
Coons, S. J., Kothari, S., Monz, B. U., & Burke, L. B. (2011). The Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium: Filling measurement gaps for PRO endpoints to support labeling claims. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 90, 743–748. CrossRef
Schuck, P. (2014). Assessing reproducibility for interval data in health-related quality of life questionnaires: Which coefficient should be used? Quality of Life Research, 13, 571–585. CrossRef
- Assessing test–retest reliability of patient-reported outcome measures using intraclass correlation coefficients: recommendations for selecting and documenting the analytical formula
Stephen Joel Coons
- Springer International Publishing